Tynes v. State

Citations

• 17 Tex. Ct. App. 123
• 1884 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 181

Syllabus

<p>1. Practice &emdash; Pleading&emdash;Indictment.&emdash;It is a general rule in criminal that an indictment or information should charge the offense in the very language of the statutory words which characterize the offense, or should use words similar in import and signification to the statutory words.</p> <p>3. Same &emdash; Threats.&emdash; The statute (Penal Code, art. 813) defining the offense of writing and sending or delivering a letter threatening death or violence to another prescribes that the act shall be “ knowingly ” done. The in this case charges that the act was “ unlawfully ” done. Held, to charge the offense, inasmuch as the word “ unlawfully ” neither comprehends nor is equivalent in meaning to the word “ knowingly.”</p> <p>3. Same.&emdash;Inasmuch as a serious threat to take life is a single and a definite act, it is not required that the particular mode or means be set out, but an for such offense will be sufficient if it charges that the defendant “ did then and there unlawfully, feloniously and seriously threaten to take the life of ” another. The practice is different, however, when, as in this case, the offense sought to be charged is the sending of a threatening letter for the purpose of extorting money. In such case the indictment should set out the composition in hcec verba, in conformity with the rule that, “when a written instrument enters into an offense as a part or basis thereof, or when its proper construction is material, the instrument should be set out in the indictment.” See the opinion in extenso on the question.</p>