Hartgraves v. State, No. 36476
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
| Writing for the Court | WOODLEY |
| Citation | 374 S.W.2d 888 |
| Parties | Jimmy B. HARTGRAVES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Decision Date | 05 February 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 36476 |
Page 888
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
J. W. Reid, Abilene, (On Appeal Only), Clay Coggins, Roby, for appellant.
Clyde Boose, County Atty., Sweetwater, Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.
The appeal is from a conviction upon an indictment alleging that the appellant contributed to the delinquency of nine named children under 17 years of age 'by acting in conjunction with said minor children in causing, encouraging and permitting said minor children to drink alcoholic beverages, to wit beer, which action on the part of the said Jimmy B. Hartgraves tended to injure
Page 889
and debase the morals, health and welfare of said minor children * * *.'The court, in his charge, instructed the jury that the evidence showed that one of the named children was over 17 years of age and that there was no evidence that another of said children was present, and submitted the case to the jury and authorized a conviction upon a finding beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant contributed to the delinquency of the remaining seven children in causing and encouraging them to drink beer, as alleged in the indictment, and the further finding that each or either of said seven children was over 10 and under 17 years of age.
The jury found the appellant guilty and assessed his punishment at 30 days in jail and a fine of $100.
We overrule the appellant's contetion that the indictment should have alleged that the named children were delinquents (or were dependent and neglected children). We do not agree that Art. 534 Vernon's Ann.P.C. is violated only when the child is a delinquent and the accused contributes to his or her further delinquency.
The word 'permitting,' which appears in the indictment, may be treated as surplusage. The court's charge did not authorize a conviction upon a finding that the appellant 'permitted' the children to drink beer.
We find no error in the overruling of appellant's exception to the indictment.
The appellant filed an amended motion for new trial alleging, among other grounds, that the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court were contrary to the law and the evidence, and further alleging that he would not be able to get a full, correct and complete statement of facts in the case because the veteran court reporter would be unable, due to his physical condition,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris v. State, No. 69366
...supra (voir dire examination); Gamble, supra (final arguments during guilt and punishment before the jury); and, Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex.Cr.App.1964) (hearing on motion for new [T]he burden is on appellant to establish that he ha[s] been deprived of his statement of fa......
-
Jones v. State, No. 45977
...the more rational rule, as urged in this dissent. 1 Cf. Parker v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 853; Hartgraves v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 374 S.W.2d 888; Pierson v. State, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 15, 177 S.W.2d 975; Navarro v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 196, 147 S.W.2d 2 Cf. Article 36.14, V.A.C.C.P.; Taylor......
-
Routier v. State, No. 72795.
...Crim.App.1982) (voir dire examination); Gamble v. State, 590 S.W.2d 507, 509 (Tex. Crim.App.1979) (final arguments); Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex. Crim.App.1964) (hearing on motion for new trial). We have said that "the circumstances in such cases should be viewed from the ......
-
Melendez v. State, No. 808-95
...in agreeing upon same; viewed from his standpoint the latter party "unjustly deprived" of record on appeal); Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, at 889-890 (Tex.Cr.App.1964) (because counsel tendered to county attorney and trial judge a statement of facts which they arbitrarily refused to ......
-
Harris v. State, No. 69366
...supra (voir dire examination); Gamble, supra (final arguments during guilt and punishment before the jury); and, Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex.Cr.App.1964) (hearing on motion for new [T]he burden is on appellant to establish that he ha[s] been deprived of his statement of fa......
-
Jones v. State, No. 45977
...the more rational rule, as urged in this dissent. 1 Cf. Parker v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 853; Hartgraves v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 374 S.W.2d 888; Pierson v. State, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 15, 177 S.W.2d 975; Navarro v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 196, 147 S.W.2d 2 Cf. Article 36.14, V.A.C.C.P.; Taylor......
-
Routier v. State, No. 72795.
...Crim.App.1982) (voir dire examination); Gamble v. State, 590 S.W.2d 507, 509 (Tex. Crim.App.1979) (final arguments); Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, 890 (Tex. Crim.App.1964) (hearing on motion for new trial). We have said that "the circumstances in such cases should be viewed from the ......
-
Melendez v. State, No. 808-95
...in agreeing upon same; viewed from his standpoint the latter party "unjustly deprived" of record on appeal); Hartgraves v. State, 374 S.W.2d 888, at 889-890 (Tex.Cr.App.1964) (because counsel tendered to county attorney and trial judge a statement of facts which they arbitrarily refused to ......