Jones v. State

• Decision Date: 18 June 1890
• Citation: 13 S.W. 990
• Parties: JONES <I>v.</I> STATE.
• Court: Texas Court of Appeals

13 S.W. 990

JONES

v. STATE.

Court of Appeals of Texas.

June 18, 1890.

Appeal from district court, Navarro county; RUFUS HARDY, Judge.

Croft & Croft and A. W. O. Hicks, for appellant. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.

WILLSON, J.

This conviction is for murder in the second degree, and is based mainly upon the admissions made by defendant soon after the homicide. He stated, in substance, that he killed deceased, but that he killed him in self-defense. There was no evidence adduced by the prosecution directly contradicting the defendant that he killed deceased in self-defense. Some slight circumstances were proved by the state, tending to show that the homicide was actuated by malice, and negativing the theory of self-defense, but it cannot be said that defendant's claim of self-defense was disproved by the state.

On the trial appellant's counsel requested a special instruction, as follows: "When the admissions or confessions of a party are introduced in evidence by the state, then the whole of the admissions or confessions are to be taken together, and the state is bound by them, unless they are shown to be untrue by the evidence; such admissions or confessions are to be taken into consideration by the jury as evidence in connection with all other facts and circumstances of the case." This instruction was refused, and defendant reserved a bill of exception. We think that, under the facts of this case, the instruction was pertinent, correct in principle, and should have been given. We do not wish to be understood as holding that, in all cases when the admissions or confessions of a defendant are admitted in evidence against him, it is necessary to give such or a similar instruction to the jury. What we decide is that, in this case, in which the criminating evidence consists almost entirely of defendant's admissions that he killed the deceased, the instruction should have been given in view of the fact that the exculpatory portion of defendant's statements about the homicide were not shown by the state's evidence to be untrue. We are of the opinion, however, that in all cases where admissions and confessions of a defendant are admitted in evidence against him, and such admissions or confessions contain exculpatory or mitigating statements, it would be proper and just to the defendant to instruct the jury as was requested in this case. Pharr's Case, 7 Tex. App. 478; 1 Greenl. Ev. (9th Ed.) §§ 218, 219, 442, 443; 1 Bish. Crim. Proc. §§ 1235, ...