Whitesides v. State

Decided June 20, 1900

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1900-06-20

Tried below before Hon. W. W. Glass, County Judge. Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully carrying a pistol; penalty, a fine of $35. J. M. Whitesides testified that he is defendant’s father, and that defendant, at the time charged, lived with witness, at his house, on the place of Dr. Jones. Witness rented a part of Dr. Jones’ farm, and was permitted by him to use the pasture for his stock. There was no limit to the number of stock he was to put in the pasture.

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently March 1954

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1900-06-20

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1 ON MOTION EOR REHEARING.

¶2 October 24, 1900.

HENDERSON, Judge.

¶3 This case comes before us on motion for rehearing. Appellant in his motion calls our attention to the requested charge instructing the jury in effect not to regard the expression of the county attorney as to witnesses committing perjury in pistol cases. The motion for new trial would seem to cover this charge,' reserving an *154 exception to the refusal of the court to give the same. We were therefore in error in holding that no charge was requested on this subject. While accurately speaking the county attorney was not authorized to make such observation, yet it does not occur to us that this affords sufficient ground for reversal. We do not deem it necessary to discuss other questions raised in the motion for rehearing, as they were all discussed in the original opinion rendered, and we see no reason to change our views as heretofore expressed. The motion for rehearing is overruled.

¶4 Motion overruled.

Download

Copy

Embed on your site

Hover to preview · click to copy the code

Search Wikipedia →

Case posture

Posture: APPEAL from the County Court of Gonzales. Tried below before Hon. W.W. GLASS, County Judge. Appeal from a conviction of unlawfully carrying a pistol; penalty, a fine of $25. J.M. Whitesides testified that he is defendant's father, and that defendant, at the time charged, lived with witness, at his house, on the place of Dr. Jones. Witness rented a part of Dr. Jones' farm, and was permitted by him to use the pasture for his stock. There was no limit to the number of stock he was to put in the pasture. The well (where Miller testified to seeing defendant with the pistol) was in this pasture, about 300 yards from witness' house. He had the right of free ingress and egress in and from the pasture, and so had the defendant. Defendant lived with witness and got up his horses and cattle whenever he desired. The pasture contained several hundred acres of land. Defendant testified: The well is in the pasture; I go into the pasture at all times, night and day, and get up my and my father's stock. I live at my father's house, in the pasture, and have no other home. R.E. Miller, the only State's witness, testified that defendant's father put stock in this pasture, like the other renters. The well had been used by the Whitesides for family use, and maybe they used it then. (At the time he accused defendant with drawing the pistol.) Defendant requested the following charge, which was refused: The jury are instructed that it is not against the law for a person to carry a pistol on his premises, or at his usual place of business; and if you find that defendant did, as charged, have a pistol on or about his person, but that at the time he was on his premises, or at his place of business, you will acquit him. And in this connection you are instructed that if defendant's father had the use of the pasture in question, for the use of his stock, and used the same for said purpose, and had the use and entry of said pasture for himself and family; and that defendant was a member of his father's family, and also had the right to use and enter the same, in the usual course of the business or occupation in which he was then engaged, whether conjointly with others or not, said pasture was the premises and place of business of the defendant, within the meaning of the law. Defendant excepted to the refusal to give the charge and made it the ground for new trial.

Source: CourtListener

Court

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Parallel citations

58 S.W 1016