Reid v. State

Decision Date16 December 1920
Docket Number(No. 6026.)
Citation226 S.W. 408
PartiesREID v. STATE.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from Kaufman County Court; J. P. Coon, Judge.

Ed Reid was convicted of child desertion, and he appeals. Affirmed.

Ross Huffmaster, of Kaufman, for appellant.

Alvin M. Owsley, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant was convicted in the county court of Kaufman county of child desertion, and his punishment fixed at a fine of $25 and 30 days' confinement in the county jail.

Appellant has two bills of exceptions in the record, which is very short. But one witness testified, he being the gentleman with whom appellant left his two children some time in February, 1920. This witness testified that appellant brought his two little girls, one about five years old, and the other younger, to witness' house and left them there, agreeing to pay $50 a month for their keep, and that during the months of February and March appellant paid a total of $57, and thereafter paid no more. Some time in July this witness caused complaint to be filed against appellant, charging him with willfully deserting said children. The trial occurred in September, 1920, and while testifying said witness further stated that after the complaint against appellant was filed said children were taken to the Salvation Army Orphanage. The first bill of exceptions complains of the admission of the testimony in the record to the taking of said children to the orphanage. No conversation appears in the record or is shown in the bill as accompanying said transaction. We think the whereabouts and condition of said children from the time appellant left them with said witness were material facts as affecting the question of his willful abandonment and desertion of them. The fact that they were taken by the witness, or any other person, six or eight months after appellant left them, to the orphanage, would not be evidence that would be injurious to him, and we do not think that any error was committed in the admission of such testimony. The other bill of exceptions complains that said witness was permitted to testify that after appellant was arrested he gave bond. We see nothing in this bill presenting any error.

The other matters appearing in the motion for new trial are not presented by bills of exceptions, and we cannot consider them.

We do not think the trial court erred in refusing to instruct a verdict of not guilty, nor do we think the record without evidence to support...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • Fulton v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 5, 1930
    ...admissible. Noodleman v. State, 74 Tex. Cr. R. 611, 170 S. W. 710; Curd v. State, 86 Tex. Cr. R. 552, 217 S. W. 1043; Reid v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 364, 226 S. W. 408. Objection was also made to proof of the contents of a will which purported to devise property to another made after appella......
  • Harcrow v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 9, 1924
    ...254 S. W. 974; Ferguson v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 253 S. W. 290; Rabon v. State, 94 Tex. Cr. App. 393, 251 S. W. 806; Reid v. State, 89 Tex. Cr. R. 364, 226 S. W. 408; Watson v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 189, 220 S. W. 329; Wilson v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 538, 223 S. W. 217; Slade v. State, 85 T......
  • Gray v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 29, 1925
    ...note 20; Holloway v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 126, 224 S. W. 1102; Begonia v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 310, 226 S. W. 405; Reid v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 364, 226 S. W. 408. As we understand the statement of facts, before her marriage to the appellant the deceased had a son, Jesse McDavid, and the......
  • Ramos v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 1, 1927
    ...201 S. W. 1158; Watson v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 189, 220 S. W. 329; Wilson v. State, 87 Tex. Cr. R. 538, 223 S. W. 217; Reid v. State, 88 Tex. Cr. R. 364, 226 S. W. 408; Claybrook v. State, 95 Tex. Cr. R. 88, 252 S. W. 766; Madsen v. State, 95 Tex. Cr. R. 439, 254 S. W. 955; Flowers v. Stat......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT