Daniels v. State
| Decision Date | 30 March 1910 |
| Citation | 126 S.W. 1153 |
| Parties | DANIELS v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Hunt County; R. L. Porter, Judge.
Jim Daniels appeals from a conviction. Reversed and remanded.
Looney & Clark, for appellant. John A. Mobley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and his punishment assessed at three years' confinement in the penitentiary.
1. It is made to appear from a bill of exceptions that upon the trial appellant offered to prove by the witness Joe Humphreys that he was acquainted with the general character of the prosecuting witness, Jane Daniels, and that she was a ferocious, dangerous, and high-tempered woman, and that she bore that reputation in the town of Greenville, Hunt county; that he had been a peace officer in the county for seven or eight years, and knew her, and was acquainted with her character for peace and quietude, but that it was not good. This testimony was objected to by the state upon the ground that it was immaterial and irrelevant, and it was rejected by the court. It may be stated that as a general rule evidence as to the character of the person injured is not admissible, but there is a well-settled exception to this general rule. In all cases of homicide and assaults, the general character of the deceased or injured party may be proved by the defendant to show that he (the defendant) was justified in believing himself in danger of losing his life or of sustaining serious bodily injury from the deceased or injured party. The court, in its qualification to the bill, says that at the time this testimony was offered there was no evidence that the witness Jane Daniels had ever made any threats of any character against the defendant. It seemed that the trial court was under the impression that the general character of the injured party could never become the subject of inquiry, unless in a case where threats had been made against the life of the party. Jane Daniels, the injured party, took the stand and testified that on the night of the assault she and the defendant, who was her husband, had been to a neighbor's house, and that they had drank some beer there, and started on home, and that they were walking arm in arm, and the defendant was talking affectionately to her, and all of a sudden, without a word or anything, drew his knife and cut her, making two long gashes, one reaching around her throat from ear to ear. This wound was a dangerous one. Appellant testified that his wife had been down to this house drinking beer, and that he had seen her in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Henry v. State
...v. State, 30 Tex. App. 160, 16 S.W. 903, 28 Am.St.Rep. 899; Dodson v. State, 44 Tex.Cr.R. 200, 70 S.W. 969." In Daniels v. State, 58 Tex.Cr.R. 569, 126 S.W. 1153, it was held error to refuse to allow the accused to prove that the injured party, in a difficulty, had the general character of ......
-
Meeks v. State, 19606.
...Cr.R. 58, 18 S.W.2d 641; King v. State, 104 Tex.Cr.R. 583, 286 S.W. 231; Reid v. State, 80 Tex.Cr.R. 288, 189 S.W. 483; Daniels v. State, 58 Tex.Cr.R. 569, 126 S.W. 1153; Ross v. State, 115 Tex.Cr.R. 152, 29 S.W.2d 381; Richardson v. State, 94 Tex.Cr.R. 616, 253 S.W. 273. We have heretofore......
-
Ball v. State
...the difficulty. Such proof is admissible whether threats are involved or not. Branch's Annotated Penal Code, § 2095; Daniels v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 569, 126 S. W. 1153. Again, where the defendant accused of murder seeks to justify himself on the ground of threats against his own life, he ......
-
White v. State
...Day v. State, 138 S. W. 130; Williams v. State, 7 Tex. App. 163; Keye v. State, 53 Tex. Cr. R. 322, 111 S. W. 400; Daniels v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 569, 126 S. W. 1153. As seen by the first ground in the above motion, and relied on by appellant, it is alleged that the complaint charged the ......