Ex parte Beacom

Citations

• 12 Tex. Ct. App. 318

Syllabus

<p>1. Habeas Corpus for Bail—Practice in this Court.— Being in custody under an indictment for murder, the appellant applied to the District Court for allowance of bail, and from the refusal of it appeals to this court. The record shows conflicting testimony on the controlling questions of the case. In view of the superior advantages of the court a quo to determine the comparative credibility of the conflicting witnesses, and because no error in its action is apparent, the judgment refusing bail is affirmed.</p> <p>2. Same.— “Proof is Evident” in such cases if the evidence would suffice to sustain a verdict against the appellant of murder in the first degree. If the evidence is of less efficacy the proof is not “ evident,” and bail should be allowed.</p> <p>3. Same — Express Malice.— A sudden killing, though without apparent provocation or obvious motive, may he attended with such facts and circumstances as suffice to show that it was done with the sedate, deliberate mind and formed design characteristic of that express malice which distinguishes murder of the first from murder of the second degree.</p>