Tracey v. State

61 S.W. 127, 42 Tex. Crim. 494, 1901 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 25
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 13, 1901
DocketNo. 2150.
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 61 S.W. 127 (Tracey 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
Tracey v. State, 61 S.W. 127, 42 Tex. Crim. 494, 1901 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 25 (Tex. 1901).

Opinion

HENDERSON, Judge.

Appellant complains in the motion for new trial, that the court did not give a charge on accomplice testimony, and he contends that two of the witnesses were accomplices, and that such a charge should have been given by the court. The record suggests appellant is correct as to two of the witnesses occupying the attitude of accomplices. See Stone v. State, 22 Texas Crim. App., 185. However, appellant asked no charge on this subject, and. it being a misdemeanor case, before he can complain, a written charge should have been requested and refused. Appellant also insists that the evidence fails to support the verdict, in that it is not shown, if appellant was engaged in using lewd women for immoral purposes, that he was so. engaged at any house. Under our construction of article 360, Penal Code, we do not believe it was necessary to prove that appellant was keeping the lewd women at some house for other men’s uses, as the statute says that “any room or part of a building or other place appropriated or used for either purposes above enumerated is a disorderly house within the meaning of this chapter.” The proof shows that appellant was carrying the women around through the country, stopping at various places, and, while lewd practices -wore not carried on in a tent, they had a tent along with them, and the prostitution was carried on in the hack and wagon, which were under appellant’s control. He was evidently the keeper, and received a part of the proceeds paid them for prostitution. Moreover, he is shown to have hired them by the month to travel with him in the capacity of prostitutes. The judgment is affirmed.

was convicted for keeping a disorderly house, and his punishment assessed at a fine of $200; hence this appeal.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Carter v. State
234 S.W. 535 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1921)
O'Brien v. State
201 S.W. 179 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1918)
Moore v. State
181 S.W. 438 (Texas Supreme Court, 1915)
Kosmoroski v. State
127 S.W. 1056 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1910)
Williams v. State
110 S.W. 63 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1908)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
61 S.W. 127, 42 Tex. Crim. 494, 1901 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 25, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/tracey-v-state-texcrimapp-1901.