Ray v. State

Citations

• 13 Tex. Ct. App. 51
• 1882 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 185

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice—Circumstantial Evidence.—It is a settled rule of practice in this State that when the prosecution relies solely upon circumstantial evidence to secure the conviction of a defendant, it is incumbent on the trial court to instruct the jury in regard to the character of such evidence, as a part of the law of the case, and whether asked so to do or- not.</p> <p>2. Same—Charge of the Court.—Ho particular or definite form of language in which the court shall instruct the jury upon the character of circumstantial evidence is prescribed; but if the ideas conveyed by the charge are correct, and are so expressed as to meet the comprehension of the jury, it is sufficient.</p> <p>3. Same—Theft—Evidence.—In a prosecution for theft, there was evidence tending to establish a dona fide purchase by the accused of the alleged stolen property, but the trial court failed to charge the jury upon the issue thus presented. Held, that the omission was error, and that it was the duty of the court to instruct' upon every phase of case made by the evidence.</p> <p>4. Same—Hew Trial.—See a state of case in which, in view of absent evidence for which a continuance was asked and refused, a new trial should have been awarded.</p>