Hinman v. State
| Decision Date | 28 October 1908 |
| Citation | 113 S.W. 280 |
| Parties | HINMAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Eastland County; J. H. Calhoun, Judge.
Owen Hinman was convicted of seduction, and he appeals. Appeal dismissed.
Scott & Brelsford and T. L. Hutchinson, for appellant. F. J. McCord, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted at the August term, 1907, of the offense of seduction. Motion for a new trial was overruled, and notice of appeal given. On account of the sickness of the judge, or for some cause, sentence was not pronounced at that term of the court. Sentence was, however, at the following January term, passed upon appellant. Under this state of the case the question is: Had the court the legal authority to pass sentence when he did?
Under our statute and decisions this question must be answered in the negative. Article 837, Code Cr. Proc. 1895, reads as follows: "Where, from any cause whatever, there is a failure to enter judgment and pronounce sentence upon conviction during the term, the judgment may be entered and sentence pronounced at any succeeding term of the court, unless a new trial has been granted, or the judgment arrested, or an appeal has been taken." Article 884, Code Cr. Proc. 1895, provides: This latter article has been construed in many decisions. These decisions hold that prior to the adoption of the above article, in cases where an appeal had been taken, the rule was that the appeal suspended all proceedings in the trial court, and it had no authority to amend or substitute the record. Since the enactment of the latter article, however, it has been held to mean that after notice of appeal has been given,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Mayhew v. State
...of this court has attached, no order can be made in the trial court of any character except as authorized by statute. Hinman v. State, 54 Tex. Cr. R. 435, 113 S. W. 280. See, also, White's Ann. Crim. Proc. § 1236. It would seem unnecessary to cite authorities in support of the announced pro......
-
Houlihan v. State
... ... What is significant for our purpose here is that the period of suspension of execution of the sentence during appeal terminates with service of alias capias after mandate upon defendant here July 12, 1977 Article 44.11, V.A.C.C.P.; see decisions under predecessor articles such as Hinman v. State, 54 Tex.Cr.R. 434, 113 S.W. 280 (1908); Ray v. State, 154 Tex.Cr.R. 362, 227 S.W.2d 216, 218 (1950). Thus, on that date, at the earliest, execution of the sentence imposed by the trial court actually began ... Second, Section 3e(a) provides that for purposes of ... ...
-
Ex parte Brown, 45374
...in this case. See Vernon's Ann.C.C.P.1925, Art. 772, O.C. 686; 3 Williams v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R., 536, 170 S.W. 482; Hinman v. State, 54 Tex.Cr.R. 434, 113 S.W. 280, 281; Offield v. State, 61 Tex.Cr.R. 585, 135 S.W. 566, 568; Ex parte Pruitt, 139 Tex.Cr.R. 438, 141 S.W.2d 333; Cf. Ex parte......
-
Walker v. State
...pp. 48, 51; Saufley v. State, 48 Tex. Cr. R. 563, 90 S. W. 640; Quarles v. State, 37 Tex. Cr. R. 362, 39 S. W. 668; Hinman v. State, 54 Tex. Cr. R. 434, 113 S. W. 280; Estes v. State, 38 Tex. Cr. R. 506, 43 S. W. 982. Under these statutes and decisions the trial court was without authority ......