Sparks v. State
| Decision Date | 04 June 1887 |
| Citation | 5 S.W. 135 |
| Court | Texas Court of Appeals |
| Parties | SPARKS v. STATE.<SMALL><SUP>1</SUP></SMALL> |
By two witnesses, one of them being the owner of the cow, the state proved that defendant notified the said owner that he had shot the said cow, and warned her that he would kill the animal if it again trespassed upon his field. Another witness testified that he saw the defendant drive the cow from his field, and shoot her after she had gained the highway outside of the field. All of the witnesses testified that the cow was not a breachy animal, and that the defendant's fence was not a legal and sufficient fence.
Clark, Dyer & Bolinger, for appellant. Asst. Atty. Gen. Davidson, for the State.
Appellant has been convicted under article 680 of the Penal Code, upon an information charging him with unlawfully and willfully maiming and wounding a cow. After the evidence in the case was adduced, appellant's counsel presented written instructions to the court, with the request that they be given in charge to the jury as the law of the case. This the court refused, and the court furthermore refused and declined to give any charge whatsoever to the jury. To the action of the court a bill of exceptions was reserved, and it is insisted that it was the duty of the court, under the circumstances, to have given a written charge. It is provided by statute that "in criminal actions for misdemeanors the court is not required to charge the jury except at the request of the counsel on either side; but, when so requested, shall give or refuse such charges, with or without modification, as are asked in writing." Code Crim. Proc. art. 681. This statute does not make it obligatory upon the court to prepare and give a written charge when requested to do so by the parties, but only requires the court to give or refuse such charges as are asked in writing. If charges are asked in writing, the court shall give or refuse them with or without modification. But if the court refuses such as are asked, it is not required to supplement them by any charges of its own. It may still, if it desires, decline to give any written charge in the case. In misdemeanors, the object and policy of the law seems to be to relieve the court of the burden and necessity of giving charges, unless the parties deem it necessary that such instructions as they may...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Herrington v. State
...because it did not correctly charge the law. Hobbs v. State, 7 Tex. App. 118; Lawrence v. State, 20 Tex. App. 536; Sparks v. State, 23 Tex. App. 448, 5 S. W. 135; Mealer v. State, 145 S. W. 354. The state's witness, Miss Spangler, or Robinson, was not an accomplice, and the court did not er......
-
Briscoe v. State
...to give charges as asked, with or without modification, or to refuse them. Jones v. State, 22 Tex. App. 680, 3 S. W. 478; Sparks v. State, 23 Tex. App. 447, 5 S. W. 135. We further observe that no witness testified that said knife was a deadly weapon, or one with which death or serious bodi......
-
Cunningham v. State
...is not bound to qualify or modify an illegal or erroneous instruction, but may refuse it outright." Again, this court, in Sparks v. State, 23 Tex. App. 448, 5 S. W. 135, in construing statutes on the subject of giving written requested charges in misdemeanor cases, said: "This statute does ......
-
Ethridge v. State
...when, as a matter of fact, he was guilty if he falsely and maliciously made them. Lawrence v. State, 20 Tex. App. 536; Sparks v. State, 23 Tex. App. 448, 5 S. W. 135; Hobbs v. State, 7 Tex. App. 118; Perkins v. State, 144 S. W. 245; Mealer v. State, 145 S. W. 354. It is unnecessary to cite ......