Spearman v. State
| Decision Date | 26 March 1895 |
| Citation | 30 S.W. 229 |
| Parties | SPEARMAN v. STATE. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from district court, Harrison county; W. J. Graham, Judge.
D. L. Spearman was convicted of murder, and appeals. Affirmed.
Mann Trice, for the State.
The appellant was tried in the district court of Harrison county under an indictment charging him with the murder of one Horace Stephens. He was found guilty by the jury of murder in the first degree, and his punishment assessed at death, and from said conviction he prosecutes this appeal.
The appellant filed and presented a motion to set aside and quash the indictment in this case, on the ground, as he alleges, that defendant was compelled against his own will, and while under arrest, by officers of the law, to appear before the grand jury, and make a statement and give evidence of and concerning the offense with which he stands charged by indictment. The defendant swears to the motion, but no issue appears to have been joined on it, and no facts elicited in regard to same, if, indeed, such a course of procedure as the motion contemplated could have been had under our statutes. Article 523, Code Cr. Proc., authorizes a motion to set aside an indictment upon two grounds only, and that suggested by appellant is not one of the grounds named. See Williams v. State, 20 Tex. App. 357.
It appears that, when the witness Curtis was on the stand, he was asked by the state's counsel to state what the defendant said to him in a conversation while he was under arrest. The defendant objected, on the ground that defendant had not been warned. The witness stated: That, while he and J. W. Ethridge were in the sheriff's office, the defendant came in there, and the witness (Curtis) said to him: That then Ethridge threw the rope that came off the dead body of deceased on the table in front of defendant, and asked him if he had ever seen that rope before, and that defendant looked out of the window, and dropped his head, and said nothing, and looked hacked. The bill of exceptions shows that the same conversations and incidents had been drawn out of the witness Ethridge by the defendant over the state's objections, and that Ethridge's conversation with defendant was admissible, even if the state had offered it, because, on account of statements then made by defendant, the clothing deceased had on when he was...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Williams v. State
...such as finding the secreted or stolen property or the instrument with which he states the offense was committed." Spearman v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 279, 30 S. W. 229; Collins v. State, 20 Tex. App. 419; Branch's Ann. Texas P. C. § The body of the deceased, Hal St. Clair, was found in his p......
-
Maxey v. State
...or writing is given in evidence by one party, the whole on the same subject may be inquired into by the other." And in Spearman v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 279, 30 S. W. 229, it is held, where the defendant has drawn out parts of the conversation he had with a witness, it is permissible for th......
-
State v. Lloyd
...against him on the evidence so elicited. There are also cases like Mencheca v. State (Tex. Cr. App.) 28 S. W. 203, and Spearman v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 279, 30 S. W. 229, holding that such examination of the accused before the grand jury is no ground for a motion to quash the indictment. T......
-
Sanford v. State
...as tending to show motive at least on appellant's part for the killing. Ex parte Mosby, 31 Tex. 566, 98 Am. Dec. 547; Spearman v. State, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 279, 30 S. W. 229; Lane v. State, 73 Tex. Cr. R. 268, 164 S. W. 378; White's An. P. C. § 1231; White's C. C. P. § 1070, and following secti......