Washington v. State

Citations

• 23 Tex. Ct. App. 336
• 5 S.W. 119
• 1887 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 80

Syllabus

<p>1. Perjury.—Practice.—If the perjury assigned be evidence given by the accused as a witness in a case under judicial investigation, the materiality of his testimony is a question of law and not of fact. But, like any other question of law, it may be so mingled with the facts that the court should submit it to the jury, with proper instructions upon the law. In no event, however, can the materiality of the testimony assigned as perjury be established by the opinions of witnesses.</p> <p>2. Same—Evidence.—The perjury assigned being the false testimony given by the defendant upon the trial of one Gr., the trial court erred in permitting certain witnesses who served as jurors upon the trial of Gr. to testify, upon this trial, that they discredited and discarded the evidence of this defendant in considering of their verdict in the Gr. case. See the opinion on the question.</p> <p>3. Same—Charge of the Court.—The record and judgment in the proceeding in which the perj ury was alleged to have been committed, while not admissible in evidence to be considered by the jury indiscriminately, was admissible as matter of inducement in the matter assigned as perjury. When admitted for this specific purpose, it became the duty of the trial court to give to the jury an instruction as to the purpose of its admission and the extent to which it could be considered. The omission of such an instruction was material error.</p>