Edwards v. State

Decision Date23 February 1910
Citation125 S.W. 894
PartiesEDWARDS v. STATE.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Ft. Bend County; Wells Thompson, Judge.

Hattie Edwards was convicted of assault with intent to murder, and appeals. Affirmed.

Russell & Pearson, for appellant. John A. Mobley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

RAMSEY, J.

By indictment filed in the district court of Ft. Bend county on November 5, 1909, appellant was charged with assault with intent to murder one Joe Smith. On November 15th thereafter she was found guilty as charged in the indictment, and her punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of three years.

The statement of facts is very short. Prosecuting witness testified that in June of last year, about 12 o'clock at night, while lying on the bed next to the window that opened on the gallery at the house of his sister, Charity Anderson, appellant appeared at the window, cursed him, and leaned in and cut him on the arm; that he rolled over to get out of the bed, and she climbed in and cut him on the shoulder; that he ran in the next room, and she tried to follow him, but his sister came in with a pistol, and kept her off of him. He testified further that the wounds were very severe, and the one on the arm, which is across the elbow, was not at the time of the trial fully healed. The testimony of the witness Smith is fully corroborated by that of O. K. Davis, as well as appellant's sister, Charity Anderson. J. H. Stanley, introduced by the state, testified that he went to see Smith at his sister's solicitation, and found him severely cut on the arm and back of the shoulder; that he was bleeding at a great rate, and he thought he would have bled to death, had he not received assistance; that he had enough acquaintance with human anatomy and with knife wounds to be able to say that Smith was quite seriously cut; that he called in a physician to wait on him. He also testified that a knife or any sharp instrument capable of making the wounds that Joe Smith had is a dangerous weapon, and used in that manner would likely produce death.

Appellant was the only witness introduced in her own behalf. Her testimony in its entirety is in these words: "After I got off the farm, I stopped at Sugarland. I had left most of my clothes with Charity Anderson at Richmond, and meant to go there some time soon and get them. The day defendant got out he came to my house at Sugarland and begged me to give him railroad fare to Richmond. That was 25 cents, but I gave him a dollar. He went up on the morning train, and I went up in the afternoon. I saw him on the streets that evening, and he tried to jump on me; but people kept him off. He had beat me up before, and had gone to the farm for it; and he had also gone to the farm for hitting Homer Kemp in the mouth with a piece of iron and knocked all her teeth out. He told me that evening I couldn't get my clothes; but I told him I left them with Charity and was going to get them. That night I went to Charity's house and knocked on the door, but couldn't get an answer. I knocked two or three times, but nobody answered; but I could hear them in there. I walked down the gallery to the window, and there was Joe sitting up in the bed, and O. K. was in it, too, and Charity was standing right close up to it. Joe and Charity cursed me, and I told them I wanted my clothes. Joe said for me to get away from there or he would kill me, and he commenced to slip his hand out to the side of the bed where Charity stood, and she tried to hand him a pistol that she had in her hand. I grabbed him and cut him. I did this to keep him from getting the pistol and shooting me, as I...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 cases
  • Regittano v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 8 Febrero 1922
    ...shall be charged in every case with regard to each affirmative independent offense. McCall v. State, 14 Tex. App. 353; Edwards v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 342, 125 S. W. 894. It is believed, however, that where, as in the instant case, the defensive theory is an affirmative one — that is, wher......
  • Walker v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 17 Marzo 1920
    ...therefor, it was not essential that the doctrine of reasonable doubt be appended to each paragraph of the charge. Edwards v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 342, 125 S. W. 894, and other cases listed in Vernon's Texas Crim. Statutes, vol. 2, p. 684, note Upon a careful review of the record, we are co......
  • Cole v. State
    • United States
    • United States State Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma. Court of Criminal Appeals of Oklahoma
    • 5 Marzo 1921
    ... ... the other instructions given, in any way tended to deprive ... defendant of proof of his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, or ... resulted to his prejudice to the extent of depriving him of a ... fair trial. See, also, Teague v. State, 100 S.W ... 401; Edwards v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 342, 125 S.W ... 894; James v. State, 74 Tex. Cr. R. 139, 167 S.W ... 727; Nance v. State, 126 Ga. 95, 54 S.E. 932; ... Watts v. State, 9 Ga.App. 500, 71 S.E. 766 ...          Further ... it is contended that the trial court erred in giving ... instruction ... ...
  • Andrews v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 6 Mayo 1925
    ...as to demand a reversal in every instance in which the rule is not observed. See McCall v. State, 14 Tex. App. 353; Edwards v. State, 58 Tex. Cr. R. 342, 125 S. W. 894; Regittano v. State, The facts in the case, the conduct of the trial, and the charge of the court, as a whole, should be lo......

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