McKelvey v. State

263 S.W.2d 774, 159 Tex. Crim. 378, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1900
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 18, 1953
Docket26610
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 263 S.W.2d 774 (McKelvey 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
McKelvey v. State, 263 S.W.2d 774, 159 Tex. Crim. 378, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1900 (Tex. 1953).

Opinions

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This is a case of rape by assault, with punishment assessed at 10 years in the penitentiary.

The prosecutrix was the eleven-year-old sister-in-law of the appellant. The mother of the prosecutrix and the wife of appellant (prosecutrix’ sister) left prosecutrix and appellant at the mother’s home when they left for town to do some shopping. According to the testimony of the prosecutrix, the rape occurred in the home during their absence. Upon their return, prosecutrix immediately told her mother what had happened and about the crime committed. The mother and father of prosecutrix carried her to town and to the officers.

An examining physician corroborated the prosecutrix as to the recent penetration of her private parts.

Appellant denied the act alleged, and protested his innocence.

It was the province of the jury to believe the state’s testimony.

The statements which prosecutrix made to her mother were in the nature of an outcry and a part of the res gestae.

The trial court did not err in permitting the introduction of such testimony. Williams v. State, 145 Tex. Cr. R. 536, 170 S. W. 2d 482; Hall v. State, 141 Tex. Cr. R. 607, 150 S. W. 2d 404.

A bill of exception appears, complaining of argument of state’s counsel. The trial court’s qualification appended to this bill of exception, which appellant accepted, shows that the argument complained of was in reply to argument of appellant’s counsel. Having accepted the bill of exception as so qualified, appellant is bound thereby. Being in reply to argument of appellant’s counsel, the argument complained of was authorized.

No error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

[380]*380Opinion approved by the court.

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

Related

Slater v. State
317 S.W.2d 203 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1958)
Farrar v. State
277 S.W.2d 114 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1955)
McKelvey v. State
263 S.W.2d 774 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1953)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
263 S.W.2d 774, 159 Tex. Crim. 378, 1953 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1900, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mckelvey-v-state-texcrimapp-1953.