Tally v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
The following statement of the case in the brief of the Assistant Attorney-General is 'substantially correct: The State’s case in substance is, that the police of the city in which the burglarized house was situated, became suspicious of appellant and one Will Haney. About midnight of the alleged burglary, the police saw appellant and Haney come to the store of the prosecutor; that either appellant or Haney broke open the door.
Read the full summary
The following statement of the case in the brief of the Assistant Attorney-General is 'substantially correct: The State’s case in substance is, that the police of the city in which the burglarized house was situated, became suspicious of appellant and one Will Haney. About midnight of the alleged burglary, the police saw appellant and Haney come to the store of the prosecutor; that either appellant or Haney broke open the door. The testimony would warrant the conclusion that Haney broke open the door and entered the house; that appellant stood close to the door on watch. The officers…
1Opinion of the Court
Appellant was convicted of burglary. The State asked the witness McKee the following question: "Had you received instructions that there was a plan on foot to burglarize that house." Objections were urged and sustained and the question was not answered. The district attorney in his opening remarks to the jury, stated, in substance, while commenting upon the excluded question and proposed evidence of McKee, "If defendant's counsel had not objected and if the court had not excluded the proffered testimony of said McKee, he could have shown by said witness why the officers were watching said…
2Cited by2 opinions
- Ballard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1924
- Howard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1944