Duncan v. State

255 S.W. 729, 96 Tex. Crim. 22, 1923 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 755
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Duncan v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 90 Tex. Crim. 479
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 14, 1923·No. No. 7737.·Published

Opinion

MORROW, Presiding Judge.-

— The offense is manslaughter; punishment fixed at confinement in the penitentiary for a period of three years.

On the issue of self-defense the testimony of appellant and that of Gordie Davis was in conflict. The privilege of testing her qualification as a witness preliminary to receiving her evidence was denied appellant, and on' her cross-examination she was shown, without objection from the State, to have been an unpardoned convict. This disqualified her as a witness, and appellant’s motion to exclude her testimony should have been sustained. The statute is discussed and decisions cited in Corzine v. State, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 340.

The error requires a reversal of the judgment, and it is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

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

Duncan v. State, 255 S.W. 729, 96 Tex. Crim. 22, 1923 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 755 (Tex. 1923).

255 S.W. 729 (Duncan v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Corzine v. State
226 S.W. 686 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1921)