Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

59 Tex. Crim. 141

127 S.W 832

May v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1910-03-09

<p>1.—Abusive language—Charge of Court.</p> <p>Upon trial of using abusive language, etc., the court should have applied the law to the facts of the ease in his charge; but in misdemeanor cases such failure can not be considered on appeal unless a bill of exceptions has been reserved.</p> <p>2. —Same—Evidence—Allusion to Former Trial.</p> <p>Upon trial for using abusive language towards another, it was reversible error _ to permit the State’s counsel on cross-examination of defendant to ask him if he had not been convicted in the case on a former trial. Following Davis v. State, 54 Texas Crim. Rep., 236, and other cases.</p> <p>3. —Same—Jurisdiction—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>Where, upon appeal from a conviction of using abusive language to another, the record showed that the prosecution originated in the Justice’s Court, and was appealed to the County Court where appellant was again convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $5, the Court of Criminal Appeals was without jurisdiction.</p> <p>4. —Same—Certiorari—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>Where, upon appeal in a misdemeanor, a writ of certiorari was granted to the State to show want of jurisdiction in Court of Criminal Appeals by perfecting the record, there was nothing in the contention that the State could not impeach its own record or go behind the same, as the question was jurisdictional.</p>

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently April 1917

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1910-03-09

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

RAMSEY, Judge.

¶1 Our Assistant Attorney-General has filed in this case a motion for rehearing and certiorari. The motion in substance alleges that this prosecution was originally begun in the Justice Court of Titus County wherein a conviction was had and that thereafter the case was appealed to the County Court of said county, when on trial appellant was again convicted and his punishment assessed at a fine of $5, and that in view of the penalty assessed in the County Court this court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. The motion for certiorari was granted and in response thereto a full transcript of the proceedings had, and papers filed in the Justice Court have been certified to this court by the county clerk of the county above named. Appellant has filed, a contest to this motion which is in the nature of an exception to the sufficiency of the State’s motion to perfect the record, on the ground that it does not sufficiently identify the papers and orders necessary to be certified and further that the State can not impeach the record in the case, or go behind the same. There is no merit in any of these objections. The issue made *144 by the State’s motion is jurisdictional and it is within the power of this court to ascertain and determine these facts. The record showing that the court is without jurisdiction to entertain the appeal the motion for rehearing will be granted and the judgment reversing and remanding the case will be set aside and the appeal will be dismissed.

¶2 Dismissed.

/59/texcrim/141 · .json · Public domain