Vestal v. State

Citations

• 3 Tex. Ct. App. 648

Syllabus

<p>1; Former Jeopardy. — The constitutional guaranty against second jeopardy is limited to cases affecting life or liberty. If, however, on a trial for an offense which involves life or liberty there can be a conviction for a minor degree which does not, then a former conviction or acquittal of such minor degree will bar a second prosecution for the greater offense.</p> <p>2. Same.—If, for an offense involving life or liberty, a party be once placed upon his trial, on a valid indictment, before a competent court, with a competent jury duly impaneled, sworn, and charged with the case, he is then placed in jeopardy from a repetition of which upon the same indictment, or upon any other indictment for the same offense, the constitutional guaranty forever protects him; and, after such jeopardy has once so attached, a discharge of the jury, without his consent, before they have rendered a verdict, is equivalent to an acquittal. Parehman v. The State, 2 Texas Ct. App. 228, cited with approval.</p> <p>8. Kecord. — Parol evidence is not admissible to contradict, vary, or falsify a record. The admissibility of such evidence to prove what matters were litigated in a previous suit is limited to cases wherein the record is silent or ambiguous.</p> <p>4. Same. — To amend or supply a record in a criminal case at a subsequent . term, a proceeding for that special purpose is necessary.</p> <p>5. Same — Oase Stated. — To an indictment for aiding an escape the accused pleaded former acquittal, setting out a former indictment and judgment whereby it appeared that, despite his objection, the state, after submitting the case to a jury, was allowed to dismiss it before verdict. To this plea of former acquittal the attorney for the state filed a replication, alleging, in effect, that the former indictment was in fact quashed, though not so shown by the record. Held, error to entertain the replication and allow the record contradicted by paroi evidence.</p>