Legal Opinion

Purcell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided June 23, 1926No. 9644PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtLattimore, J.

In a forcible motion ap-pellánt insists that we erred in our holding as to the reversible character of the alleged misconduct of the jury. We have carefully reviewed the testimony in the light of the motion. That Juror R. M. Hill did make reference to the failure of appellant to testify must be admitted; but the manner, surroundings, and probable effect of such reference must not be lost sight of. After stating that he read the court’s charge, wherein the jury were told that the failure of the defendant to testify could not be considered against him, we quote what Mr. Hill swore:

“I read it…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Boozer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1917

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. White v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1950
  2. Day v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1932
  3. White v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1950
  4. White v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1950

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

Powered by the Exa API