Horbach v. State
Citations
- 43 Tex. 242
Syllabus
<p>1. Evidence of generad character of deceased—Murder.— In a prosecution for murder the general character of the deceased may be proved when it would serve to explain the actions of the deceased at the time of the killing, but the actions it would serve to explain must first be proved before permitting proof of the character of deceased, and if no such acts are proved, its rejection is not error.</p> <p>2. Evidence of threats, when a proper subject of expdanation BY the court.—By the code threats are admissible as independent evidence, without first establishing a predicate for their admission by proof of acts done at the time of the killing, to which they might give additional force, but the effect of such evidence may be subsequently explained away and destroyed by the charge of the court in the absence of evidence tending to prove such acts.</p> <p>3. Charge of court.—Before admitting evidence of the general character of the deceased there must he a predicate established, by evidence already submitted, tending to prove threats of the deceased, or some act done by him at the time of the killing which it would aid to explain. When such evidence is admitted, it would be proper and not charging on the weight of evidence for the court to explain to the jury the object of its admission as auxiliary ancl explanatory of the threats or acts to which it was pertinent, and to be not of itself independent evidence of a defense,</p> <p>é. Jury, how impaneled.—In impaneling a jury in a capital case the names of the persons summoned should be called in the order they stand upon the list, and when found qualified they are to be challenged either peremptorily or for cause, or accepted severally, as each one is determined by the court to be a qualified juror, which is to be continued one by one until the jury is fully formed to the number of twelve. Ho law or established practice under the law is known which sanctions the peremptory challenge of a juror by either party in such ca
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that the death of an appellant during the pendency of an appeal deprives the appellate courts of jurisdiction
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Roberts
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.