Parks v. State, 18402.
Decision Date | 21 October 1936 |
Docket Number | No. 18402.,18402. |
Citation | 99 S.W.2d 943 |
Parties | PARKS v. STATE. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Hidalgo County; Bryce Ferguson, Judge.
John E. Parks was convicted of murder, and he appeals.
Reversed and remanded.
S. L. Gill, of Raymondville, and Cameron & Hardin, of Edinburg, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
The offense is murder; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for eight years.
It was charged in the indictment, in substance, that appellent, with malice aforethought, killed Frank Beale by shooting him with a gun.
The homicide occurred on the 17th of April, 1935, near the Dew Drop Inn in the city of Mercedes. Appellant was an officer and was wearing a pistol on the occasion of the difficulty. He and a soldier had gone to the inn together, and were drinking at the bar. Deceased and a friend were present. Deceased was sitting at a table some distance from the bar. Appellant, the soldier, and the friend of deceased were standing at the bar throwing dice for the drinks. Appellant won. Deceased went to the bar and accused appellant of cheating his friend, and immediately knocked appellant down. Appellant's body struck a door, breaking the panel. Appellant made no effort to pull his pistol after being assaulted by deceased. He stated to deceased that he had not cheated his friend. Deceased then offered to apologize. Appellant declined to shake hands with him. Appellant and his companion left the tavern and deceased followed them. Deceased again knocked appellant down and when appellant still refused to shake hands with him, he told him that he was going to whip him again. He started toward appellant in an effort to strike him again. Appellant drew his pistol and fired two shots, the second taking effect. Deceased was an ex-prize fighter, the proof showing that he was physically a powerful man. Appellant was no match for him.
The State introduced in evidence appellant's voluntary statement and the dying declaration of deceased. We quote from appellant's statement as follows:
The foregoing statement embraces a declaration to the effect that this was the first trouble appellant and deceased had ever had. We quote from the dying declaration as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Godsey v. State
...to that extent. The court did not address or discuss specific intent to kill, which could be present despite the absence of malice. See Parks, supra. King, does not support appellant's contention that specific intent was found to be lacking in King and therefore, by comparison, is not shown......
-
Sadler v. State
...251 S.W. 1096; Hawkins v. State, 115 Tex.Cr.R. 163, 29 S.W.2d 384; Allison v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 428, 99 S.W.2d 917; Parks v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 464, 99 S.W.2d 943; Spivey v. State, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 11, 171 S.W.2d 140; McDonough v. State, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 111, 178 S.W.2d 863; Watson v. State,......
-
Beckham v. State, 21454.
...S. W.2d 1017; Hunt v. State, 123 Tex.Cr.R. 559, 59 S.W.2d 836. See, also, Herrera v. State, 117 Tex.Cr.R. 389, 36 S.W.2d 515; Parks v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 464, 99 S. W.2d 943; Chappell v. State, 124 Tex.Cr. R. 187, 61 S.W.2d 842; Stephens v. State, 125 Tex.Cr.R. 397, 68 S.W.2d 181; Morgan ......
-
Henderson v. State
...the evidence is insufficient as a matter of law to support a finding that the homicide was actuated by malice. In Parks v. State, 131 Tex.Cr.R. 464, 99 S.W.2d 943, 945, upon which appellant relies, this Court was careful to 'A re-examination of the evidence indicates that deceased for some ......