Watson v. State

226 S.W. 411, 88 Tex. Crim. 314, 1920 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 452
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Watson v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 90 Tex. Crim. 576
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided December 16, 1920·No. No. 6018.·Published

Opinion

*315 LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the Criminal District Court of Dallas County of the offense of murder and his punishment fixed at ten years in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without any statement of facts or bills of exceptions. We have examined the charge of the Court and conclude that it substantially presents the law of the case. There appears one special charge which was refused, but as it relates to a matter of testimony, and we are not informed therein of sufficient facts to show that it was error to refuse it, we would be compelled to hold that such refusal presents nothing justifying reversal. There appearing no error in the record which would require a reversal of the case, its affirmance is ordered.

Affirmed.

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

Watson v. State, 226 S.W. 411, 88 Tex. Crim. 314, 1920 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 452 (Tex. 1920).

226 S.W. 411 (Watson v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.