Madden v. State
| Decision Date | 08 March 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 33013,33013 |
| Parties | Roberta MADDEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
W. H. Betts, J. C. McEvoy, Hempstead, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DICE, Commissioner.
The conviction is for murder without malice; the punishment, 5 years.
The proof shows that the appellant was the deceased's wife. They owned a home near the City of Hempstead in Waller County but were separated and living apart at the time of the killing. On the day of the homicide, appellant hired the State's witness Steve Washington to carry her from Houston to Hempstead for the purpose of attempting a reconciliation with her husband. When they arrived, appellant first went into the house and Washington remained in the automobile. Later, Washington went into the house. Washington testified that after he went inside, appellant and the deceased began talking about the furniture and in the conversation the deceased said, 'Well, where is my gun?' and appellant said, 'Here it is,' and reached in her purse and removed a gun therefrom. Washington testified that at such time the deceased was seated on the bed and appellant was standing by the deceased with the gun in her hand, holding it 'right out toward him.' Washington stated that when he saw the deceased get up from the bed be 'wheeled' and ran and, as he stated outside, heard a shot fired.
The proof further shows that soon after the shooting appellant appeared at the jail and reported to Deputy Sheriff Jimmie Whitworth that she had shot her husband but stated that she did not know if he was dead. At such time, appellant delivered to the officer a .38 caliber Smith & Wesson pistol which contained one fired shell and two or three shells which were loaded.
Deputy Whitworth and Sheriff A. S. Fletcher thereupon went to the scene of the shooting and when they arrived found the dead body of the deceased lying on the ground at the back door of the house with a gunshot would through the shoulder in the region of the heart.
Testifying as a witness in her own behalf. appellant stated that on the day in question she returned to the home hoping to 'patch things up'; that after she went inside deceased asked her about the pistol; that she went in the bathroom where she had hidden the pistol and put it in her purse; that when she returned and produced the pistol the deceased grabbed it, and the pistol discharged as they were struggling over possession of the same. Appellant testified that she did not know whether it was she or the deceased who pulled the trigger but admitted that after the shooting she signed a written statement, which the State later introduced in evidence, in which she stated that she had shot the deceased.
The court submitted the issue of appellant's guilt to the jury upon a charge on the appellant's right of self-defense against a deadly attack at the hands of the deceased and also submitted to the jury the defense of accident.
Appellant insists that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction because (1) it does not show that she fired the pistol and (2) the proof fails to show the cause of death of the deceased.
The issue as to whether appellant unlawfully shot and killed the deceased with the gun as charged in the indictment or the gun was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Scott v. State
...a homicide may be established by circumstantial evidence. Easley v. State, 564 S.W.2d 742, 749 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Madden v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 80, 344 S.W.2d 690, 692 (1961). "It is not essential that every fact point directly and independently to the guilt of the accused, and the cumulat......
-
Palafox v. State
...jury. Bruce v. State, 402 S.W.2d 919 (Tex.Cr.App.1966); Vaughns v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 465, 358 S.W.2d 133 (1962); Madden v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 80, 344 S.W.2d 690 (1961). These attempts to modify or qualify the rule serve only to demonstrate its irrationality. Truth is not obtained by bi......
-
Gonzales v. State
...delicti may be established by circumstantial evidence. Easley v. State, 564 S.W.2d 742, 749 (Tex.Crim.App.1978); Madden v. State, 344 S.W.2d 690, 692 (Tex.Crim.App.1961). It is not essential that every fact point directly and independently to the guilt of the accused, and the cumulative for......
-
Moulton v. State, 48337
...under every defensive theory finding support in the testimony. A charge on exculpatory statements was not required. Madden v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 80, 344 S.W.2d 690 (1961); Vaughns v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 465, 358 S.W.2d 133 (1962); Bruce v. State, 402 S.W.2d 919 (Tex.Cr.App.1966); William......