Darnell v. State
| Decision Date | 12 October 1887 |
| Citation | 5 S.W. 522 |
| Parties | DARNELL v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Wood county; F. J. McCORD, Judge.
The opinion states the case.
No appearance for appellant. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.
In 1883, Charles Darnell, the appellant herein, was indicted in the district court of Wood county for the murder of William Gilbraith. In the same year he was tried in said court upon said charge, and was found guilty of murder in the first degree, and the death penalty was assessed against him. He appealed from said conviction to this court, and on the fourteenth day of November, 1883, this court affirmed the said judgment of conviction. 15 Tex. App. 70. After said affirmance, and before sentence, information was made to the district court of Wood county that the defendant had become insane. A trial was had in said court upon said issue, and he was found and adjudged to be insane, and was confined in the lunatic asylum, from which, after the lapse of some six or seven months, he was discharged as sane, and delivered again into the custody of the sheriff of Wood county. At the November term, 1886, of the district court of Wood county, said court was informed, by the affidavit in writing of a credible person, that said Darnell had become sane. Said court thereupon caused a jury to be impaneled to try said issue, and said jury returned a verdict that said Charles Darnell was sane; whereupon said court adjudged him to be sane. From this last verdict and judgment this appeal is prosecuted, and the assistant attorney general moves to dismiss said appeal, upon the ground that this court has no jurisdiction to entertain the same.
It appears from the record before us that the proceedings had in the trial court with reference to the sanity of the defendant have all been regular, and conducted in strict accordance with the provisions of the statute. Code Crim. Proc. tit. 12, c. 1. He has been found to be sane by the verdict of a jury, and has been so adjudged by the trial court. It is provided by statute that "when, upon the trial of an issue of insanity, it is found that the defendant is sane, the judgment of conviction shall be enforced as if no such inquiry had been made." Code Crim. Proc. art. 960. It is nowhere provided by statute, either expressly or impliedly, that the defendant shall have the right to appeal from a judgment rendered in such proceeding. It is clear to our minds that it is the intention of the statute that the judgment of the trial court, adjudging the defendant to be sane, shall be conclusive of that issue, and thereupon the judgment of conviction must be enforced.
The right of appeal is given a defendant in any criminal action, upon conviction. Code Crim. Proc. art. 837. This evidently means that the right...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jackson v. State
...upon as the historical basis of such position reveals that such cases did not address the question here presented. See Darnell v. State, 24 Tex.App. 6, 5 S.W. 522; Millikin v. Jeffrey, 108 Tex.Cr.R. 84, 299 S.W. 435; Holland v. State, 52 Tex.Cr.R. 160, 105 S.W. 812; Ex parte Morris, 96 Tex.......
-
Comminwealth v. Moon
...refused review of any nature: Bingham v. State, 82 Okl.Cr. 305, 169 P.2d 311; Bulger v. People, 61 Colo. 187, 156 P. 800; Darnell v. State, 24 Tex.App. 6,5 S.W. 522; State ex rel. Lyons v. Chretien, 114 La. 81, 38 27; Ex parte Chesser, 93 Fla. 590, 112 So. 87. In People v. Ross, 344 Ill.App......
-
McCorquodale v. State
...been rendered and entered adjudging defendant guilty of an offense. Washington v. State, 31 Tex. Cr. R. 84, 19 S. W. 900; Darnell v. State, 24 Tex. App. 6, 5 S. W. 522; Pate v. State, 21 Tex. App. 191, 17 S. W. 461. The judgment of conviction rendered may be conceded to consist of two parts......
-
Blake v. State
...no appeal lies to this court, and for that reason a discussion of the motion mentioned is not deemed necessary. See Darnell v. State, 24 Tex. App. 6, 5 S. W. 522; Millikin v. Jeffrey, 108 Tex. Cr. R. 84, 299 S. W. 435; Ex parte Millikin, 108 Tex. Cr. R. 121, 299 S. W. 433. On the call of th......