Keaton v. State
Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
Citation | 57 S.W. 1125 |
Parties | KEATON v. STATE.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
Decision Date | 11 April 1900 |
Appeal from district court, Coleman county; J. O. Woodward, Judge.
Pearce Keaton was convicted of murder, and appeals. Affirmed.
Jenkins & McCartney, for appellant. Sims & Snodgrass and Robt. A. John, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
Appellant was convicted of the murder of Lee Johnson, and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for life. Appellant testified in his own behalf substantially as follows:
Appellant's first assignment is that the court erred in overruling his application for continuance, after the district attorney and private prosecutor and defendant, by his attorneys, had orally agreed to continue the case until the September term of the court, which agreement was announced to the court; whereupon the court stated he would not allow said cause to be continued, but it must proceed at once. The court qualifies this bill as follows: We do not think the mere agreement of counsel to continue the cause requires the court to grant the continuance; and where a trial judge refuses to ratify such agreement and continue the case, unless some legal reason is shown whereby an injustice has been done appellant, it will not be cause for reversal.
Appellant's second assignment contends that the court, at the time this case was tried, was not lawfully in session, and had no jurisdiction at said time and place to try it, because the legislature had, since the convening of the court, repealed the law fixing the time for holding terms of the district court in and for Coleman county by passing an amendment fixing the times for holding said court in said county, which terminated the February term, 1899, of said court, and this court could not again lawfully be in session before the first Monday in September, 1899; and defendant excepted to the jurisdiction of this court to try this cause at said time. The court overruled the exception. The regular time for the convening of the term of court at which appellant was tried was the first Monday in February, 1899, to continue in session four weeks. The court was organized on said day. While the court was in session and being held under the then-existing law, the legislature passed an act, with the emergency clause attached, merely adding to the term of court for Coleman county one week. The amendment provided for the term to begin the first Monday in February and to remain in session five weeks. It will be seen from this that the beginning of the term was not changed, and that the clear intendment of the legislature was simply to give one additional week to Coleman county for the district court, and the amendment was not intended to have a retrospective effect, so as to repeal the then-existing term of the district court of Coleman county. Article 5, § 7, of the constitution provides: The bare statement of this constitutional provision would certainly preclude the construction of the amendment by the legislature as contended for by appellant; his contention being that the amendment repealed the previous law whereby the session of the district court of Coleman county was authorized to begin on the first Monday in February. If this is a repeal of the old law, then Coleman county would be deprived of one term of the district court, which would be in the face of the constitutional provision quoted. We do not think the court erred in overruling appellant's plea to the jurisdiction.
Appellant's third assignment is that the court erred in refusing to set aside various jurors who stated on their voir dire that they had formed and had a clear, well-defined, and fixed opinion as to the guilty participancy of appellant in the attempt to rob the express at Coleman Junction, at the time the fireman was killed, and that it would require evidence to remove said opinion, but that they had no opinion as to the guilt or innocence of defendant upon the charge of murder in this case. The trial court appends this explanation, to wit: The lengthy explanation of the trial court shows appellant...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Com. ex rel. Smith v. Myers
...of the body of an innocent person to escape harm in flight from the scene of the crime. See, e.g., Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125 (1900); Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 564, 55 S.W. 961 (1900); and Wilson v. State, 188 Ark. 864, 68 S.W.2d 100 (1934). These cases were not bas......
-
Campbell v. State, 63
...482 S.W.2d 600, 604 (1972); Wilson v. State, 188 Ark. 846, 849-52, 68 S.W.2d 100, 102 (1934); Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Crim. 621, 633-34, 57 S.W. 1125, 1129 (1900); Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Crim. 564, 570-74, 55 S.W. 961, 964-65 (1900); see Pizano v. Superior Court of Tulare County, 21 Cal.3d......
-
State v. Canola
...of Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 564, 55 S.W. 961 (Cr.App.1900) aff'd 63 S.W. 330 (Cr.App.1901), and Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125 (Cr.App.1900). In attempting to escape after robbing a train, defendants thrust the brakeman in front of them as a shield, as a result of whic......
-
Commonwealth v. Almeida.
...purpose was criminally tainted with the malice which motivated their planning of the robbery. In Keaton v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125, 1129, another one of the same train robbers was convicted of murder in the first degree for killing the fireman. The Texas Court of Criminal Ap......
-
Com. ex rel. Smith v. Myers
...of the body of an innocent person to escape harm in flight from the scene of the crime. See, e.g., Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125 (1900); Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 564, 55 S.W. 961 (1900); and Wilson v. State, 188 Ark. 864, 68 S.W.2d 100 (1934). These cases were not bas......
-
Campbell v. State, 63
...482 S.W.2d 600, 604 (1972); Wilson v. State, 188 Ark. 846, 849-52, 68 S.W.2d 100, 102 (1934); Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Crim. 621, 633-34, 57 S.W. 1125, 1129 (1900); Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Crim. 564, 570-74, 55 S.W. 961, 964-65 (1900); see Pizano v. Superior Court of Tulare County, 21 Cal.3d......
-
State v. Canola
...of Taylor v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 564, 55 S.W. 961 (Cr.App.1900) aff'd 63 S.W. 330 (Cr.App.1901), and Keaton v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125 (Cr.App.1900). In attempting to escape after robbing a train, defendants thrust the brakeman in front of them as a shield, as a result of whic......
-
Commonwealth v. Almeida.
...purpose was criminally tainted with the malice which motivated their planning of the robbery. In Keaton v. State, 41 Tex. Cr. R. 621, 57 S.W. 1125, 1129, another one of the same train robbers was convicted of murder in the first degree for killing the fireman. The Texas Court of Criminal Ap......