Harmon v. State

Citations

• 3 Tex. Ct. App. 51

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence.—Declarations of the accused are competent evidence in his. favor only when they were part of the res gestes; that is, were made at the time of the transaction, and were expressive of its character, motive, or object. Such declarations are regarded as verbal acts indicative of a present purpose, and, therefore, admissible in evidence.</p> <p>2. Same. — On trial for theft of cattle the accused was allowed to introduce and prove a bill of sale for the cattle made to him by another, four days after he had taken and sold the cattle, and then he proposed to prove the conversation had by him with his alleged vendor at the time the bill of sale was made. Meld, that such conversation cannot be regarded as part of the res gestee, and, therefore, it was properly excluded.</p> <p>3. Newly-discovered Evidence.—Anew trial will not be granted on account of evidence which, with proper diligence, could have been, but was not, discovered before the trial; nor on account of evidence cumulative of that adduced at the trial.</p> <p>4. Practice. — Objection to confessions because made in custody should be interposed when they are offered in evidence, and comes too late in a motion for a new trial.</p>