Brookin v. State

Citations

• 26 Tex. Ct. App. 121
• 9 S.W. 735
• 1888 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 169

Syllabus

<p>2. Jurisdiction—Practice.—A person accused of crime committed in this State is amenable in the courts of this State notwithstanding he was kidnapped in another State or Territory and brought thence against his will and without lawful authority.</p> <p>2. Practice—Continuance.—Refusal of a c.ontinuanee asked on account of absent witnesses was relied upon as cause for new trial, and the refusal of a new trial is assigned for error; but it is apparent of record that due diligence was not used to obtain the testimony of the absent witnesses, and it is not apparent that them testimony would probably be true, if adduced as alleged. Held, no cause for reversal.</p> <p>8. Theft—Evidence.—In a trial for horse theft a State’s witness testified that, soon after the’theft, he went to a certain place and there found the stolen horses in the possession of the defendant and two other men. Over objection by the defense the witness was permitted to make the further statement that he went to the said place for the purpose of locating the defendant, in compliance with the request of the sheriff of the county. Held that this explanation was proper and legitimate for the purpose of repelling any inference to the discredit of the witness.</p> <p>£. Practice—Cross Examination.—The extent and character of a eross examination is left largely to the discretion of the trial judge, and ordinarily will not be revised on appeal—no abuse of judicial discretion nor injury to the accused being apparent of record.</p>