McMillan v. State

Citations

• 7 Tex. Ct. App. 142

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice. — Subject to certain prescribed regulations, the general control of criminal trials is confided to the discretion of the judges who preside thereat; and on this court is devolved the duty of correcting abuses of that discretion to the prejudice of defendants.</p> <p>2 Same. — Witnesses may be placed under the rule at the instance of either party, and be kept in charge of an officer or allowed to go at large as the court may direct; and by like direction those for the prosecution may be kept separate from those for the defence. A wide discretion over the subject is vested in the presiding judge, to the end that the integrity of the evidence may be protected against sinister influences; and the exercise of this discretion will not be revised on appeal, unless an abuse of it to the prejudice of the defendant be made to appear.</p> <p>3. Charge of the Court. — In a trial for felony the court below prominently propounded to the jury the inquiry whether, from the evidence they should find to be true, they could “ reasonably conclude that the defendant is innocent,” and in that event directed an acquittal, otherwise a conviction. Held, essentially erroneous and prejudicial to the defendant, because, overslaughing the presumption of innocence, it reversed the rule of law by requiring the jury to reach the conclusion of innocence before they could acquit. See the opinion in extenso.</p> <p>4. Challenge. — A juror already accepted cannot be challenged peremptorily.</p>