Alonzo v. State

Citations

• 15 Tex. Ct. App. 378
• 1884 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 15

Syllabus

<p>1. Adultery—Pleading—Practice.—To a prosecution for adultery the defendant pleaded in bar the acquittal of his co-defendant, setting up that, as the offense is one which could only be committed by two persons, the acquittal of one operated as an acquittal of both. Held, that the position is untenable; that the plea was properly overruled, and that under our system but two special pleas, are available in criminal cases; i. e., former conviction and former acquittal by a jury, upon a sufficient indictment before a court of competent jurisdiction. See -the opinion in extenso upon the question.</p> <p>2. Same-—Evidence.—The husband of the defendant’s paramour was a competent witness against the former in a prosecution for adultery with the wife. 0</p> <p>3. Same—Charge oe the Court.—Having omitted to charge upon the' doctrines of reasonable doubt and the presumption of innocence, the trial court erred in refusing instructions requested thereupon.</p> <p>4. Same?—That “circumstantial evidence is often as strong and conclusive upon the understanding as direct and positive evidence” is a charge upon the weight of evidence, and consequently error.</p>