Moore v. State
| Citation | 363 S.W.2d 477 |
| Decision Date | 12 December 1962 |
| Docket Number | No. 35055,35055 |
| Parties | Samuel Leroy MOORE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
Raeburn Norris, Houston, for appellant.
Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Gus J. Zgourides and Howell E. Stone, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
BELCHER, Commissioner.
The conviction is for murder; the punishment, life imprisonment.
The testimony will not be summarized except to state that it is sufficient to warrant the finding that the appellant killed the deceased by shooting her with a gun; and that the testimony of the appellant was that he shot the deceased in self-defense and in defense of his wife.
By formal bill of exception the appellant urges error because of the refusal of the official court reporter to take and the refusal of the trial judge to require her to take full shorthand notes of the closing arguments when timely and properly requested by appellant to do so. After such refusal the appellant was required to proceed in the case over his objection and exception that he was being deprived of a record of the jury arguments including his objections, and exceptions to such arguments, and the rulings and remarks of the court thereon.
The judge in his qualifications to the bill stated that he believed that the law made it appellant's responsibility to arrange for the making of a record of the arguments, which the appellant refused to do; and that the refusal to take the arguments in the instant case was harmless as he did not recall that any objections were made. But he did not directly and positively find that no objections were made.
Following the filing of the bill as qualified the appellant filed his bystander's bill. Thereafter, the court filed his bill stating therein that he believed that the appellant's bystander's bill did not reflect the true facts in the case. Then the judge directed that subpoenas be issued for the three bystanders to appear in his court. On the hearing they were examined as to matters related in the bill and also about their qualifications as bystanders because of some interest in the case.
A pauper's affidavit was timely and properly filed by the appellant requesting a transcript of the evidence which was furnished to him.
Art. 2324, R.C.S., Vernon's Ann.Civ.St. art. 2324, provides as follows:
'Each official court reporter shall:
'Attend all sessions of the court; take full shorthand notes of all oral testimony offered in cases tried in said court, together with all objections to the admissibility of the evidence, the rulings and remarks of the court thereon, and all exceptions thereto; take full...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Bolling
...recordation is made under such a statute, it is held error not to record. Thomson v. State, 389 P.2d 526 (Okl.Crim.1964); Moore v. State, 363 S.W.2d 477 (Tex.Crim.1963). The other category is similar to the federal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 753, in which there is a general duty to report all of ......
-
Jones v. State
...considered in the light of the facts which were reported. . . .' 311 F.2d at 933. Other federal cases were cited and Moore v. State, 363 S.W.2d 477 (Tex.Cr.App.1963), which involved Article 2324, Vernon's Ann.Civ.St., was clearly distinguished. In Morris, this court made clear that the tria......
-
Reyna v. State
...that the court reporter take either the voir dire examination or the arguments. Article 40.09, § 4, V.A.C.C.P. Even in Moore v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 363 S.W.2d 477, cited by appellant, tried and decided prior to the effective date of the 1965 Code of Criminal Procedure, there was a timely re......
-
Morris v. State
...which prejudiced appellant's substantial rights.' The appellant cites in support of his contention the opinion of this Court in Moore v. State, 363 S.W.2d 477. In Moore, supra, appellant showed by a bill of exception and a bystander's bill that by virtue of the court's action he was deprive......