Warfield v. State

Texas Supreme Court
Warfield v. State, 35 Tex. 736 (Tex. 1872)
Ogden

Warfield v. State

Opinion of the Court

Ogden J.

The appellant was indicted with one Charles Sheppard, for an assault upon Charles Beasley, with intent to commit murder. The appellant was put upon his trial and convicted of an aggravated assault; and from the judgment of conviction he has appealed. The indictment is sufficient in form to charge an offense, and it charges the offense for which he was tried sufficiently definite, and the court did not err in overruling the exceptions to the same.

Neither did the court err in refusing to permit Charles Sheppard to testify in behalf of his co-defendant; they were jointly indicted for the same offense, and under Article 1826, Paschal’s Digest, neither could testify for the other, unless he had been tried and acquitted. On the trial of this case the evidence of appellant’s guilt *738was not very strong, and was to some extent conflicting, but we are not prepared to say that there was not sufficient evidence to support the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the court. And as the court below did not think proper to grant a new trial with all the witnesses and facts before it, we are disinclined to disturb that judgment here. It is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

Reference

Full Case Name
Felix Warfield v. State
Status
Published
Syllabus
1. One of two persons jointly indicted for the commission of an offense is not a competent witness for the other, unless he has been previously tried and acquitted of the offense (Paschal’s Digest, Article 1836); and it is immaterial that there has been a severance in the case. 0. See this case for an indictment held sufficient in a prosecution for assault with intent to murder.