Timbrook v. State

Citations

• 18 Tex. Ct. App. 1
• 1885 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 49

Syllabus

<p>1. Evidence— Admissibility of Written Instruments — Practice.—Recordable written instruments are admissible in evidence without the filing and notice provided for by article 3357 of the Revised Statutes, but when so offered their execution must be proved. It is only when such instruments are offered without proof of execution that the filing and notice are necessary to their admissibility.</p> <p>2. Theft—Evidence.— In a trial for the theft of a cow alleged to be the property of one Helton, it was in proof that he purchased the animal from one O., and the State, over objection by the defense, was allowed to prove by Helton that the brand which was on the cow was O S M, which brand was proved by the record of marks and brands to be the brand of said O. The objection was that the proof was immaterial, and that the record was the proper evidence. Held, that the testimony was competent because it tended to identify the animal in question as one of several which the said Helton had purchased from said O. by a bill of sale, in which the cattle were described by said brand O S M.</p> <p>3. Same.—No particular form is prescribed by law for the certificate of a magistrate to testimony taken before him as an examining court. Substantial compliance with the statutory requirements is sufficient. Note, in illustration, a certificate held sufficient to manifest that, when the testimony at an examining trial was taken, the defendant was present and was accorded the right to cross-examine the State’s witnesses; wherefore, at the subsequent trial of the defendant under indictment, testimony so taken was properly admitted upon proof that the witness was then beyond the limits of this State.</p> <p>4. Same — Practice in the Court of Appeals.— Discretionary authority is conferred upon trial judges to admit evidence after the commencement of the argument to the jury, and the exercise of that discretion will not be revised on appeal unless an abuse of it clearly appears.</p> <p>5„ Con