Brown v. State
| Decision Date | 19 April 1961 |
| Docket Number | 33325,Nos. 33579,s. 33579 |
| Citation | 171 Tex.Crim. 320,349 S.W.2d 722 |
| Parties | Fleming BROWN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Harold G. Clark, Jr., Sherman, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is murder with malice; the punishment, 15 years.
The State moves to dismiss this appeal because no sentence appears in the record. In the absence of a sentence, this Court is without jurisdiction to entertain this appeal.
The appeal is dismissed.
On Appellant's Motion to Reinstate
BELCHER, Commissioner.
By supplemental transcript the record has been perfected and the appeal is reinstated.
The testimony of the state shows that the appellant and the deceased had been keeping company with each other for six or eight months, that she had told him she no longer disired his company, but he was very jealous and said he would not give her up to another man. On December 14, appellant said that if he had had a gun on her birthday (December 8) he would have killed her. Shortly after 12:30 P.M., December 15, the appellant purchased a pistol and some whiskey, drove into a rural area where he tested the pistol by shooting it seyeral times. Then he went to see the deceased who was at her sister's home, and while talking with the deceased he shot her in the left temple, the bullet passing through her brain and severing part of the spinal cord causing her death. In a brief time appellant surrendered to the sheriff, told him that he had killed the deceased and directed him to the pistol that he used.
The written statement of the appellant made December 16 was introduced by the state in making out its case in chief. It shows that appellant was jealous of the deceased, that they had had many quarrels, that he had threatened to kill her several times before he shot and killed her. The statement substantially corrborates the evidence of the state.
Appellant, testifying in his own behalf, admits that he shot and killed the deceased but states that the pistol was accidentally discharged. He states that while the deceased was removing some clothes from a closet, that as she turned she said move that thing (pistol) and she hit his hand causing the pistol to discharge and the bullet struck her in the face, and she slumped to the floor. He said he told the sheriff it was an accident when he surrendered. He denied that he intentionally shot her, that he had made any threats, and that he bought the gun to kill her. Appellant called several witnesses whose testimony showed that he bore a good reputation.
The court instructed the jury to acquit the appellant if they believed or had a reasonable doubt as to whether the pistol was accidentally discharged thereby killing the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Smith v. State
...under the common law, evidence of a violent episode occurring eight years before the victim's death. Id. In Brown v. State, 349 S.W.2d 722 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961), the trial court admitted evidence from the defendant's own written statement "showing previous quarrels and threats, and that he......
-
Flores v. State
...condition of the mind of the accused at the time of the homicide. See Coleman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 442 S.W.2d 338; Brown v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 320, 349 S.W.2d 722. We find that the complained of testimony was admissible under Article 1257a, V.A.P.C., in that it was a circumstance tendin......
-
Carmona v. State
...implicated proof of state of mind. See Smith v. State, 5 S.W.3d 673, 683, 687 (Tex.Crim.App.1999) (quoting Brown v. State, 171 Tex.Crim. 320, 349 S.W.2d 722, 724 (1961)). "Malice" is not part of the statutory language of either Section 19.02 or Section Second, although the Baldridge opinion......
-
Ferrell v. State
...the appeal and order of a affirmance by this Court were also voided. Holcombe v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 375 S.W.2d 914; Brown v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 320, 349 S.W.2d 722. The issue is therefore moot as to whether appellant was denied counsel on his previous appeal in this case. On January 11, ......