Dowling v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Dowling v. State

301 S.W.2d 920, 164 Tex. Crim. 650, 1957 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2220

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 3, 1957

Docket28925

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 301 S.W.2d 920 (Dowling 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

Dowling v. State, 301 S.W.2d 920, 164 Tex. Crim. 650, 1957 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2220 (Tex. 1957).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is murder; the punishment, death.

In view of our disposition of this case, a recitation of the facts will not be deemed necessary other than to observe that the sole defense was that of insanity.

The appellant offered into evidence his Navy service record authenticated as being accurate by the Chief of Naval Personnel and the Acting Judge Advocate General for the Secretary of the Navy, which contained, among other things, a showing that as early as 1948 the appellant was treated at the United States Naval Hospital in San Diego, California, following a suicidal attempt, and “the diagnosis of Paranoid State was established on 9. July 1948.” The service record further reflects that the appellant was discharged from the Navy shortly thereafter as “unfit for service” upon recommendation of the Medical Board.

We have concluded that the authentication set forth above was sufficient to make the record admissible under Section 2 of Article 3731a, V.A,C.S.

Clearly, the evidence recited was admissible on the issue of insanity.

Upon another trial, the arresting officer should not be permitted to testify as to his conversation with the appellant fifteen minutes after the appellant’s arrest, which was not shown to be res gestae, and the Senior Psychiatrist from the Veterans Administration Hospital, where the appellant had been a mental patient, should be permitted to testify fully from the appellant’s record in such institution when the same has been properly identified.

For the errors pointed out, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is murder; the punishment, death.

In view of our disposition of this case, a recitation of the facts will not be deemed necessary other than to observe that the sole defense was that of insanity.

The appellant offered into evidence his Navy service record authenticated as being accurate by the Chief of Naval Personnel and the Acting Judge Advocate General for the Secretary of the Navy, which contained, among other things, a showing that as early as 1948 the appellant was treated at the United States Naval Hospital in San Diego, California, following a suicidal attempt, and “the diagnosis of Paranoid State was established on 9. July 1948.” The service record further reflects that the appellant was discharged from the Navy shortly thereafter as “unfit for service” upon recommendation of the Medical Board.

We have concluded that the authentication set forth above was sufficient to make the record admissible under Section 2 of Article 3731a, V.A,C.S.

Clearly, the evidence recited was admissible on the issue of insanity.

Upon another trial, the arresting officer should not be permitted to testify as to his conversation with the appellant fifteen minutes after the appellant’s arrest, which was not shown to be res gestae, and the Senior Psychiatrist from the Veterans Administration Hospital, where the appellant had been a mental patient, should be permitted to testify fully from the appellant’s record in such institution when the same has been properly identified.

For the errors pointed out, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

301 S.W.2d 920, 164 Tex. Crim. 650, 1957 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dowling-v-state-texcrimapp-1957.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack