Brinkoeter v. State

Citations

• 14 Tex. Ct. App. 67
• 1883 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 123

Syllabus

<p>1. Obstructing Public Eoad—Presumption op Innocence—Charge op the Court—Intent is a constituent element of the offense of obstructing a public road, and it must appear that the obstruction was wilful on the part of the accused. Hence a charge of the court that “the wilful intent of the defendant is presumed, and it devolves upon him to show his innocent intent,” is erroneous, inasmuch as it conflicts directly with Article 11 of the Penal Code, which provides that “ every person accused of an ofi'e se shall be presumed to be innocent until his guilt is ■ established to the satisfaction of those whose province it is to try him.” '</p> <p>2. Same—Charge op the Court.—The court below charged the jury: “ If you believe from the evidence that the defendant is not guilty, you will acquit him.” Held, erroneous, because, overriding the presumption of innocence, it reversed the rule of law and required the jury to reach the conclusion of innocence before they could acquit.</p>