Van Phillips v. State
This text of 163 Tex. Crim. 13 (Van Phillips 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.
Opinion
The offense is assault with intent to rape; the punishment two years.
Our able state’s attorney has confessed error herein. By Bill of Exception No. 2 it is shown that the appellant was not present when his motion for new trial was overruled, that he was in jail, and that he did not waive his right to be present at the proceedings. His presence is requisite under such circumstances. Article 580, V.A.C.C.P.; Henderson v. State, 137 Tex. Cr. Rep. 18, 127 S. W. 2d 902; Manual of Reversible Errors in in Texas Criminal Cases, Sec. 362, p. 350.
The trial court attempted to qualify the bill, but an exception to such qualification was reserved over the judge’s signature which destroyed the qualification, and we are bound by the bill as originally submitted. Lovett v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. Rep. 483, 228 S. W. 2d 855, and Palmer v. State, 154 Tex. Cr. Rep. 251, 226 S.W. 2d 634.
Because of the error reflected by the bill, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
163 Tex. Crim. 13, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/van-phillips-v-state-texcrimapp-1956.