Layton v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Layton v. State

107 S.W. 819, 52 Tex. Crim. 513, 1908 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 71

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 12, 1908

DocketNo. 4075.

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 107 S.W. 819 (Layton 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

Layton v. State, 107 S.W. 819, 52 Tex. Crim. 513, 1908 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 71 (Tex. 1908).

Pincite

Opinion

BROOKS, Judge.

—Appellant was convicted of a simple assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $5.

The evidence in this ease shows that the State, over appellant’s objection, introduced a confession against him, and the bill of exceptions shows that appellant was under arrest at the time the confession was introduced. This was clearly error not only under the acts of the last Legislature, but under all the previous rules of this court. We find no evidence in this record, except the bare statement of appellant that he committed the offense. This statement was made, as suggested above, to a third party who testified to same. Appellant got upon the stand and denied in toto that he made any such confession. Even conceding that appellant was not under arrest at the time the supposed confession was made, we could not permit a verdict in this case to stand upon appellant’s confession alone.

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

Reversed and remanded.

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

BROOKS, Judge.

—Appellant was convicted of a simple assault, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $5.

The evidence in this ease shows that the State, over appellant’s objection, introduced a confession against him, and the bill of exceptions shows that appellant was under arrest at the time the confession was introduced. This was clearly error not only under the acts of the last Legislature, but under all the previous rules of this court. We find no evidence in this record, except the bare statement of appellant that he committed the offense. This statement was made, as suggested above, to a third party who testified to same. Appellant got upon the stand and denied in toto that he made any such confession. Even conceding that appellant was not under arrest at the time the supposed confession was made, we could not permit a verdict in this case to stand upon appellant’s confession alone.

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

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

107 S.W. 819, 52 Tex. Crim. 513, 1908 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 71, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/layton-v-state-texcrimapp-1908.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack