Akins v. State, 22877.

Decision Date21 June 1944
Docket NumberNo. 22877.,22877.
Citation182 S.W.2d 723
PartiesAKINS v. STATE.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; A. R. Stout, Acting Judge.

L. C. Akins was convicted of murder and sentenced to death, and he appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Noah Roark, Doss Hardin, and Baskett & Parks, all of Dallas, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal comes from a death sentence on a charge of murder.

The case was before us on a former indictment and was reversed on a different question to those raised in the instant case. See Akens v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R. 289, 167 S.W.2d 758. The first bill of exception complains of the refusal of the court to quash the indictment and abate the prosecution. The chief grounds to support this contention is that appellant is a negro; that there was no negro on the commission appointed by the court to select jurors and grand jurors for the time during which the indictment was returned. It is also complained that the grand jury did not consist of a sufficient number of negroes to give appellant that representation to which he was entitled, based on the percentage of the negro population among the qualified voters of Dallas County. Evidence in support of this motion as copied in the bill covers about thirty pages and will not be reviewed because we do not think that there was any discrimination shown. The grand jury was composed of eleven white men and one negro, who would have been in position to give evidence to sustain any complaint that a fair consideration was not given to appellant in the investigation which led to the indictment. Apparently the question has never been before this court in just the manner found in the present record and we will not enter into a discussion of the question which has no precedent in the opinions of any court so far as we can ascertain.

The second bill of exception contains an objection to being tried in the Criminal District Court before the Honorable A. R. Stout, Judge of the 40th Judicial District, who had been transferred to said court. The question here raised has been decided adversely to appellant's contention in Pierson v. State, Tex.Crim.App., 177 S. W.2d 975, and Jones v. State, Tex.Crim. App., 181 S.W.2d 75.

Bill of Exception No. 4 complains of the refusal of the court to instruct the jury to return a verdict of not guilty. The court properly refused the request and the jury found the accused guilty and assessed the death penalty. There is evidence to show conclusively that appellant killed the deceased Morris; that he intentionally shot him with a pistol while they were engaged in an altercation; and that he did so with malice aforethought.

In connection with the foregoing, we will give a brief summary of the evidence. The deceased was a member of the city police force. While off duty and not in uniform, he and his wife had attended a show and as they were boarding a street car for home, appellant pushed in ahead of Mrs. Morris, shoving her back or to one side. The deceased caught him by the arm and requested him to wait. Instead, appellant attacked Morris with his knife, with the result that Morris drew his gun, struck appellant and shot him. In the scuffle between them, Morris lost his pistol and appellant grabbed it and shot Morris in the back as he was attempting to board the car. The wound was fatal. Appellant took the pistol and made his way to the city hall, where he surrendered and gave his version of what took place. As would be expected, a great number of witnesses, some on and some off the car, testified as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Hollis v. Davis
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • September 18, 1991
    ...(1947), reversing 201 Miss. 410, 29 So.2d 96; Akins v. Texas, 325 U.S. 398, 65 S.Ct. 1276, 89 L.Ed. 1692 (1945), affirming 148 Tex.Crim. 523, 182 S.W.2d 723 (1944) (facts in record did not prove systematic exclusion); Hill v. Texas, 316 U.S. 400, 404, 62 S.Ct. 1159, 1161, 86 L.Ed. 1559 (194......
  • Hollis v. Davis, 88-7477
    • United States
    • United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (11th Circuit)
    • September 25, 1990
    ...76 (1947), reversing 201 Miss. 410, 29 So.2d 96; Akins v. Texas, 325 U.S. 398, 65 S.Ct. 1276, 89 L.Ed. 1692 (1945), affirming 148 Tex.Crim. 523, 182 S.W.2d 723 (facts in record did not prove systematic exclusion); Hill v. Texas, 316 U.S. 400, 404, 62 S.Ct. 1159, 1161, 86 L.Ed. 1559 (1942), ......
  • Anderson v. State
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Appeals
    • November 10, 1959
    ...... In such a case discrimination necessarily results where there are qualified negroes available for jury service. * * *' .         Akins v. State of Texas, 1945, 325 U.S. 398, 65 S.Ct. 1276, 1278, 89 L.Ed. 1692, affirming 148 Tex.Cr.R. 523, 182 S.W.2d 723. Akins sought to quash the ......
  • Akins v. State of Texas
    • United States
    • United States Supreme Court
    • June 4, 1945
    ...to comply with the holding of this court and of the Supreme Court of the United States upon the question of discrimination.' Akins v. State, 182 S.W.2d 723, 724. This reference to the holdings of the state and federal courts was to Akens v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R. 289, 167 S.W.2d 758, which re......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT