48 S.W. 183 (Tex.Crim.App. 1898), Fuller v. State

Citation:48 S.W. 183
Opinion Judge:DAVIDSON, J.
Party Name:FULLER v. STATE.
Attorney:N. B. Morris, for appellant. John B. Carter, Dist. Atty., and Mann Trice, for the State.
Case Date:December 07, 1898
Court:Court of Appeals of Texas, Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Page 183

48 S.W. 183 (Tex.Crim.App. 1898)




Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

December 7, 1898

Appeal from district court, Rusk county; W. J. Graham, Judge.

William Fuller was convicted of murder in the second degree, and he appeals. Affirmed.

N. B. Morris, for appellant.

John B. Carter, Dist. Atty., and Mann Trice, for the State.


Appellant was convicted of murder in the second degree, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of five years; hence this appeal.

Under the facts of this case, we do not believe the court erred in failing to charge the law applicable to manslaughter. The state made out a case of murder, and appellant's evidence, if true, made a case of self-defense. The deceased owed defendant 40 cents. For the purpose of collecting this 40 cents, defendant armed himself, and went to the residence of Will Anderson, early in the morning, before breakfast, where the deceased was then staying or living. Directly after he arrived at Anderson's, breakfast was announced, and appellant was invited to partake of the meal, but declined, and waited in the room until they returned. When the parties entered the room, appellant accosted deceased, and demanded the 40 cents. Deceased declined to pay defendant, on the ground that he only had 30 cents, and, it being Christmas time, he desired to use that, and promised payment of the 40 cents as soon as he secured it. The deceased was sitting on the floor, cleaning his shoes, at the time. Appellant asked of deceased a repetition of his statement in regard to paying the 40 cents, and deceased repeated it, where-upon appellant drew his pistol, and shot deceased through the body, from which wound he died. Appellant's defense was: That deceased and Will Anderson had robbed him the previous Saturday evening of some money, and on the same evening had returned him $3.60 of said money, and sent him a message to come to Anderson's on Monday morning, and they would return the remainder of the money. That, on the return of the parties from the breakfast room, Anderson got his pistol from his trunk, and he and deceased retired from the room and held a hurried conference (about what, the defendant was not apprised), and returned to the room, when Anderson began cursing appellant, and asked him if he intended to indict them about the money. Appellant stated that...

To continue reading