Curley v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Curley v. State

258 S.W. 184, 96 Tex. Crim. 438

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 30, 1924

DocketNo. 8001.

StatusPublished

This text of 258 S.W. 184 (Curley v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Curley v. State, 258 S.W. 184, 96 Tex. Crim. 438 (Tex. 1924).

Pincite

Opinion

LATTIMORE Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the Criminal • District Court of Tarrant county of rape, and his punishment fixed at twenty-five years in the penitentiary.

This is a companion case to No. 8002, Ralph Duncan v., State, opinion this day handed down. The facts relied upon in the instant case are similar to those in the companion case referred to. The newly discovered testimony relied upon in each case is identical. In the instant case some question relative to misconduct of the jury is raised but in view of the fact that we believe the case should be reversed for the refusal of a new trial because óf newly discovered evidence, and that the matter of misconduct will not likely occur again, we forego discussion. For a more extended statement of the facts and for our views relative to the reasons for reversal, reference is made to the Duncan ease, supra.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LATTIMORE Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the Criminal • District Court of Tarrant county of rape, and his punishment fixed at twenty-five years in the penitentiary.

This is a companion case to No. 8002, Ralph Duncan v., State, opinion this day handed down. The facts relied upon in the instant case are similar to those in the companion case referred to. The newly discovered testimony relied upon in each case is identical. In the instant case some question relative to misconduct of the jury is raised but in view of the fact that we believe the case should be reversed for the refusal of a new trial because óf newly discovered evidence, and that the matter of misconduct will not likely occur again, we forego discussion. For a more extended statement of the facts and for our views relative to the reasons for reversal, reference is made to the Duncan ease, supra.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

258 S.W. 184, 96 Tex. Crim. 438, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/curley-v-state-texcrimapp-1924.