Harris v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Harris v. State

416 S.W.2d 424, 1967 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 840

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMay 31, 1967

DocketNo. 40375

StatusPublished

This text of 416 S.W.2d 424 (Harris 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

Harris v. State, 416 S.W.2d 424, 1967 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 840 (Tex. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder with malice and his punishment was assessed by the jury at ten years.

Trial was held subsequent to January 1, 1966.

No brief for appellant was filed in the trial court.

By supplemental brief filed in this court, as in his motion for new trial, appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction in that it shows self-defense, or at least imperfect self-defense as a matter of law.

The testimony reveals that appellant, Davy Bird (the deceased), and others, were engaged in a dice game when an argument ensued between appellant and Bird, apparently because appellant refused on Bird’s request to remove a wine bottle from the table. Bird took a knife from his pocket and opened it up, and appellant drew a pistol. The players, including Bird, started running from the room. One shot was fired and Bird turned around, facing ap[425]*425pellant, and was hit with several further shots fired by appellant. He died within a few minutes.

Appellent’s contention that self-defense was shown as a matter of law is overruled.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

OPINION

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder with malice and his punishment was assessed by the jury at ten years.

Trial was held subsequent to January 1, 1966.

No brief for appellant was filed in the trial court.

By supplemental brief filed in this court, as in his motion for new trial, appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction in that it shows self-defense, or at least imperfect self-defense as a matter of law.

The testimony reveals that appellant, Davy Bird (the deceased), and others, were engaged in a dice game when an argument ensued between appellant and Bird, apparently because appellant refused on Bird’s request to remove a wine bottle from the table. Bird took a knife from his pocket and opened it up, and appellant drew a pistol. The players, including Bird, started running from the room. One shot was fired and Bird turned around, facing ap[425]*425pellant, and was hit with several further shots fired by appellant. He died within a few minutes.

Appellent’s contention that self-defense was shown as a matter of law is overruled.

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

416 S.W.2d 424, 1967 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 840, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harris-v-state-texcrimapp-1967.