Gilbert v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Gilbert v. State

39 S.W. 572, 37 Tex. Crim. 301, 1897 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 10, 1897

DocketNo. 1295.

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 39 S.W. 572 (Gilbert 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

Gilbert v. State, 39 S.W. 572, 37 Tex. Crim. 301, 1897 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94 (Tex. 1897).

Pincite

Opinion

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of adultery, and fined in the sum of §100; hence this appeal. A jury was waived, and the cause submitted to the court. The grounds of the motion for a new trial are all based upon the supposed insufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment of the court. The contention of appellant is that the conviction is based upon “the uncorroborated confession” of the defendant. It has been held in this State that the extrajudicial verbal confession of a defendant alone will not support a judgment of conviction. This statement of the law is correct, but it does not apply to this case. *302 The defendant made quite a nmabeir of confessions to various persons as to his adulterous intercourse with his alleged paramour, on various and divers occasions, extending over several months of time, and expressed regret and sorrow at the fact that he had not ascertained earlier that he could have carried on said adulterous intercourse. The facts and circumstances tend strongly to sustain these confessions. We deem it useless to go over the testimony and cull these facts. We think the testimony is sufficient, and the judgment of the court was properly rendered against him. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

DAVIDSON, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of adultery, and fined in the sum of §100; hence this appeal. A jury was waived, and the cause submitted to the court. The grounds of the motion for a new trial are all based upon the supposed insufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment of the court. The contention of appellant is that the conviction is based upon “the uncorroborated confession” of the defendant. It has been held in this State that the extrajudicial verbal confession of a defendant alone will not support a judgment of conviction. This statement of the law is correct, but it does not apply to this case. *302 The defendant made quite a nmabeir of confessions to various persons as to his adulterous intercourse with his alleged paramour, on various and divers occasions, extending over several months of time, and expressed regret and sorrow at the fact that he had not ascertained earlier that he could have carried on said adulterous intercourse. The facts and circumstances tend strongly to sustain these confessions. We deem it useless to go over the testimony and cull these facts. We think the testimony is sufficient, and the judgment of the court was properly rendered against him. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

39 S.W. 572, 37 Tex. Crim. 301, 1897 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gilbert-v-state-texcrimapp-1897.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack