Morales v. State
Decision Date | 26 June 1896 |
Citation | 36 S.W. 435 |
Parties | MORALES v. STATE.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Angelina county; James T. Polley, Judge.
Patronia Morales was convicted of murder in the first degree, and appeals. Reversed.
Mann Trice, for the State.
Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and his punishment assessed at death, and he prosecutes this appeal.
1. In this case the court gave a very lengthy charge. After defining murder in the first and second degrees, and malice, both express and implied, he then proceeded to charge on murder in the first and second degrees, manslaughter, and self-defense. No exception was taken to this charge, but, inasmuch as it is the duty of the court to correctly charge the law applicable to the case, it becomes our duty to review said charge. In order to present this matter properly, we will quote in extenso from the charge itself:
We will point out such defects in the charge as occur to us. Appellant was convicted of murder in the first degree, and, if the charge on first degree, and the charges on less degrees of culpable homicide, and the charge on self-defense were of such a character as not to present the issues clearly and fairly to the jury, they were calculated to impair the rights of the defendant. It would appear that, in the first portions of said charges above copied, the court intended merely to state the legal principles governing the case, and then to apply the principles so laid down to the facts of the case. For instance, after the court states what he has to say on the law of self-defense, he then says, "Keeping in view the foregoing rules of law," and then proceeds to charge the jury, applying the law to the facts of the case. If this be true, then as to self-defense the court merely laid down the principles governing the law of self-defense, and has not applied the law to the facts on this subject. But it rather appears to us that the first portion of said charge was an attempt to charge the law as applicable to the facts of the case, and the last portion was but a reiteration in different form of the preceding charges on the same subject. If this be true, then the jury were charged on the law of self-defense. In the charge of the court on murder in the first degree (see paragraphs 9 and 13), the charge as to murder in the first degree in the perpetration of robbery or attempted perpetration of robbery appears to be in accordance with the approved forms. See Sharpe v. State, 17 Tex. App. 486. In said last-mentioned paragraphs, the court then proceeds further to charge on murder in the first degree committed upon express malice. The court combines with this charge something in the nature of a charge on self-defense, and, when analyzed, both of these charges in a roundabout way instruct the jury, in effect, that if they believe that the killing was not done in...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Sanchez v. State
...him, so that that statement may be used to impeach him if he testifies in conflict therewith.' "Since the decision in Morales v. State, 36 Tex.Cr.R. 234, 36 S.W. 435 (1896), this court has consistently held that the confession of an accused which is inadmissible as original evidence for fai......
-
Harrold v. Territory of Oklahoma
... ... therefore admissions so obtained have no just and ... legitimate tendency to prove the facts admitted.' ... In ... State v. Novak, 109 Iowa, 717, 79 N.W. 465, the opinion ... 'The ... reason for the rule excluding involuntary confession is not ... based on ... and the testimony of the defendant, after he has denied that ... he ever made it. Shephard v. State, 88 Wis. 185, 59 ... N.W. 449; Morales v. State, 36 Tex.Cr.R. 234, 36 ... S.W. 435, 846; Wright v. State, 36 Tex.Cr.R. 427, 37 ... S.W. 732, 734; Walton v. State, 41 Tex.Cr.R. 454, 55 ... ...
-
Serrato v. State
...he became subject to cross-examination the same as any other witness, and the court did not err in so holding. Morales v. State, 36 Tex. Cr. R. 234, 36 S. W. 435, 846; Brown v. State, 38 Tex. Cr. R. 597, 44 S. W. 176; Oliver v. State, 33 Tex. Cr. R. 541, 28 S. W. 202; Jackson v. State, 33 T......
-
Dover v. State
...be referred to, but we deem it unnecessary, as the rule is so clearly stated in the Ferguson Case. However, in the case of Morales v. State, 36 Tex. Cr. R. 234 , the Quintana Case in 29 Tex. App. 401 [16 S. W. 258, 25 Am. St. Rep. 730], and other cases holding that the confessions of a defe......