Loggins v. State

Citations

• 12 Tex. Ct. App. 65

Syllabus

<p>1. Jury Law—Practice in Court of Appeals.—Unless objection is shown to one or more of the jurors who tried the case, this court will not revise the rulings of the court below on the competency or incompetency of jurors who were challenged. If, however, .the defendant exhausted his peremptory challenges, and afterwards the court erroneously overruled his challenge of a juror for cause, and forced the objectionable juror upon him, the error in the ruling is cause for reversal. For a full exposition of these rulings by a majority of the court, consult the opinion on rehearing. (Hurt, J., dissenting.)</p> <p>2. Proof of Conspiracy—Order of Evidence.— When it is sought to charge the defendant on trial with the acts or declarations of a confederate, and the proof of the complicity consists of numerous and independent circumstances, it is not imperative that the proof of the conspiracy be introduced before that of the acts or declarations. If in such a case the entire evidence suffices to establish the • conspiracy, it will be considered immaterial whether the proof of that fact preceded or followed that of the acts or declarations.</p> <p>3. Same.— Whether the proof of the conspiracy is sufficient as the predicate for that of the imputed acts or declarations is primarily a question for the trial judge in passing upon the admissibility of the evidence; but nevertheless the fact of a conspiracy remains for the determination of the jury, and when it is an issue in the case it should be submitted to them with instructions to disregard the acts or declarations unless the conspiracy was proved. See instructions of this character held correct and sufficient.</p>