Borches v. State

25 S.W. 423, 33 Tex. Crim. 96, 1894 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 48

Opinion

SIMKINS, Judge. —

1. Appellant was convicted of giving away intoxicating liquor on November 8, 1892, tbe day of tbe general election, and fined in tbe sum of $100. Appellant moved to quasb tbe nidictment because it did not allege, in intelligible words, tbe purpose for which tbe election was being held. The indictment alleges that tbe intoxicating liquor was given away in tbe said voting precinct number 2 during tbe day, “tbe said day being an election day, in which an election was then and there being held, under and by lawful authority, for tbe purpose of voting for presidential electors, congressmen, State, district, county and precinct officers, tbe same being a general election,” etc. There is nothing in tbe objection. If tbe object and purpose of bolding the said election was not that tbe voters might cast their ballots for their choice for tbe various officers, it is difficult to understand why it was held.

2. There was no error in admitting tbe minutes of tbe Commissioners Court of Donley County, wherein tbe couniy judge orders the election for county and precinct officers. Article 1680, Bevised Statutes, makes it the duty of tbe county judge to order such election, and we know no reason why such order should not be entered on the minutes, especially since two of tbe commissioners are required to act on bis failure so to do. Id. If there was error it was immaterial, for tbe election was a general election for all officers, and the court could have taken judicial notice of that fact. Rev. Stats., arts. 1659, 1679, 1760 ; Gallagher’s case, 10 Texas Crim. App., 471.

3. Appellant insists that the testimony is insufficient to authorize a conviction. Now, it may be true, as stated by appellant, that he was convicted on the evidence of a negro, who made contradictory statements, and was contradicted by appellant himself; but that was a question for the jury, and they decided adversely to appellant. The jury are the judges of the credibility of the witnesses.

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Judges all present and concurring.