Legal Opinion

Hindman v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided March 31, 1948No. 23899Published

1Opinion

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

We gather from appellant’s motion for rehearing that because we did not discuss every point raised by him he assumes they were not considered.

Many times questions are raised that have been so well settled it adds nothing to the jurisprudence of the State to discuss them again. This is illustrated in the present case by an exception to the charge of the court because the jury was not instructed that prosecutrix was an accomplice. This objection was in the face of the unbroken line of decisions to the contrary. See Hamilton v. State, 36 Tex. Cr.…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Hamilton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
  2. Battles v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1910
  3. Price v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1896
  4. Cook v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1920
  5. Ex parte MerrillCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1947

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API