Hearne v. State

66 S.W. 773, 43 Tex. Crim. 435, 1902 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 17
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided February 12, 1902·No. No. 2422.·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

BROOKS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of seven years.

The record contains no bill of exceptions. In his motion for new trial appellant complains of the court’s charge, his objection being stated as follows: “The court erred in its charge to the jury, which fact will be

more fully stated by the amendment hereafter to be filed.” The amendment subsequently filed in no particular criticises the charge of the court. The exception to the charge of the court in the original motion is too general to be reviewed, not specifically pointing wherein there is error. Quintana v. State, 29 Texas Crim. App., 403. The evidence amply supports the verdict of the jury. The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Hearne v. State, 66 S.W. 773, 43 Tex. Crim. 435, 1902 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 17 (Tex. 1902).

66 S.W. 773 (Hearne v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gillam v. State
254 S.W. 990 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Ordell v. State
254 S.W. 977 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1923)
Smith v. State
232 S.W. 811 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1921)
Byrd v. State
151 S.W. 1068 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1912)