Holland v. State

Citations

• 14 Tex. Ct. App. 182
• 1883 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 152

Syllabus

<p>1. Adultery.—Indictment for adultery described the parties as “male” and “female,” and therefore the defendant moved to quash because it charged no offense. But held, that though Article 333 of the Penal Code defines the parties to the crime of adultery as “man and woman,” and though it is almost elementary in criminal pleading that the statutory words should be used in describing an offense, it is not required that strict particularity shall be observed in an averment of sex in adultery and kindred crimes. See the opinion in extenso on the subject.</p> <p>3. Jury Law—Oath—Practice.—It is not necessary to set out in the judgment the oath which was administered to the jury trying a criminal case, the statement that the jury was “sworn according to law” being sufficient to show that fact; but, if it is attempted to set out the oath, and it appears as set out that it is not the oath prescribed by statute, the judgment will be reversed.</p> <p>3 Name.—In cases less than capital the oath to be administered to the jury is: “You and each of you solemnly swear that in the case of the State against A. B., the defendant, you will a true verdict render according to the law and the evidence; so help you God.” This oath and none other will suffice, and the recital in the judgment that “the jury wore sworn to try the issue joined between the parties ” does not show that the jury was sworn “according to law.”</p> <p>4. Same—Evidence.—Proof of marriage in adultery prosecutions may be made by the testimony of any person who has known the husband and wife to live together as married persons.</p> <p>6. Same.—That the woman with whom the adultery was committed was a common prostitute is no excuse or justification in a prosecution for adultery, and the court below did not err in excluding evidence to that effect.</p> <p>6. Charge or the Court—Reasonable Doubt.—The court charged the jury that “the defendant is entitled to the benefit of a doubt as to his guilt or innocence,” and again