Fowler v. State

<p>1. —Murder—Argument of Counsel—Practice on Appeal—Bill of Exceptions.</p> <p>It is well settled that it must appear in the bill of exceptions making it reasonably apparent what the error was, and in case of argument of counsel the bill should affirmatively show that such argument is not in answer to something said by counsel for the accused, or was not based on some evidence in the record, and that it was hurtful to the accused and not properly before the jury, etc., Following O’Neal v. State, 66 Texas Crim. Rep., 460, and other cases; and where this is not shown on appeal, there is no error.</p> <p>2. —Same—Misconduct of Jury—Rule Stated—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>Where it was complained that a reference was made by one juror to defendant’s failure to'testify, and the court heard evidence in support of this, hut the hill of exceptions was not filed until long after the adjournment of the trial setting up this matter, the same cannot be considered on appeal. Following Salazar v. State, 88 Texas Crim. Rep., 209.</p> <p>3. —Same—Evidence—Bill of Exceptions—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>A statement of his grounds of objection by defendant is not tantamount to a showing that such grounds are in fact true; and this court has held uniformly that. facts must appear in the bill which show the error complained of. In addition to this defect in the bill, no error appears inasmuch as the trial court sustained the objection of the defendant.</p> <p>4. —Same—Evidence—Threats—Presumption.</p> <p>There was no error in refusing to allow a witness to testify that defendant was a man of ordinary hearing, and it was a legitimate assumption in the instant case that the alleged threats were made in defendant’s hearing.</p> <p>5. —Same—Credibility of Witness—Rule Stated.</p> <p>Where the defense witness admitted that he had been indicted and acquitted for murder, and the State asked the witness what was the ground of his acquittal to which he answered: “self-defense,” there was no reversible error, no injury having been shown to the defendant. Following Post v. State, 10, Texas Crim. App.. 579.</p> <p>6. —Same—Affidavit—Official Stenographer—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>Affidavits of the official stenographer and clerk of the trial court as to the expiration of the trial term and the length of the time necessary to prepare the statement of facts adduced on re-hearing of the motion for. new trial, to show that the testimony offered on said hearing was not filed during the term time, were proper, in the absence of some showing to the contrary.</p> <p>7. —Same—Rehearing—Bill of Exceptions—Practice on Appeal.</p> <p>Where the bill of exceptions failed to show any error for the reason set out in the original opinion, motion for rehearing is overruled. ,</p>