For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

36 (Tex.Cr.App.) Warrant, demanding ar- and deliver standing timber for share of pro72(3) (Ky.) Contract to manufacture, sell, rest of one charged in another state with utter-ceeds need not be in writing (Ky. St. § 1409-13). ing forged check, held sufficient.-Ex parte Frymire v. Dutschke, 298 S. W. 983.

37 (Tex.Cr.App.) That alleged fugitive IX. OPERATION AND EFFECT OF STATfrom justice would be taken from state by deputy of agent designated by Governor of demanding state did not affect validity of arrest.-129(3), (Ark.) Oral agreements to pay for Ex parte Wells, 298 S. W. 904.

(C) Property and Rights Transferred. (Tex.Civ.App.) Statute dealing with ma-47 (Ark.) Restaurant keeper, incidentally chinery placed on realty as immovable fixtures has no application to property remaining personal (Rev. St. 1925, art. 5498).-Cave v. Talley Co., 298 S. W. 912.

Performance by party injured by fraud inducing contract does not, of itself, establish intent to waive right of action for damages.-W. 857.

III. PROMISES TO ANSWER FOR DEBT, thereon (Ky. St. §§ 1978, 1979).-Allison v.

GARNISHMENT.

II. PERSONS AND PROPERTY SUBJECT
TO GARNISHMENT.

cept terms of will.-Wooten's Trustee v. Hardy, 298 S. W. 963.

IV. SALES AND CONVEYANCES UNDER
ORDER OF COURT.

13 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where contractor under contract with subcontractor could retain amount to pay materialmen's claims against subcontrac-110 (Ark.) When note for price of land tor, and claims exceeded amount contractor owed subcontractor, amount was not subject to garnishment.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck, 298 S. W. 915.

105 (Tex.Civ.App.) Plaintiff in garnishment acquires no greater right by service of writ than defendant could have enforced against garnishee.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck, 298 S. W. 915.

sold by guardian was collected held immaterial on question of surety's liability for proceeds unaccounted for (Crawford & Moses' Dig. §§ 5044, 5046, 5060).-Gravette v. Williams, 298 S. W. 886.

Surety on guardian's sale bond held not entitled to complain of failure to sue sureties on both general and sale bonds after satisfaction of judgment in suit on general bond only (Crawford & Moses' Dig. §§ 5013, 5046).—Id.

To account for amount of purchase-money note paid to guardian, he must safely keep and properly disburse it, not merely charge himself therewith (Crawford & Moses' Dig. § 5046). -Id.

Collection of part of proceeds of guardian's sale of land from sureties on general bond does not release surety on sale bond (Crawford & Moses' Dig. §§ 5013, 5046).-Id.

HABEAS CORPUS.

I. NATURE AND GROUNDS OF REMEDY.

113, (Tex.Civ.App.) Writ does not reach 4 (Tex.Cr.App.) Rule that appellate funcliability under contract which has not accrued when garnishee answers.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck, 298 S. W. 915.

114 (Tex.Civ.App.) Liability of garnishee accruing after answer filed is not subject to garnishment.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck,

298 S. W. 915.

If liability has been incurred, that debt was not due when garnishee filed answer will not relieve garnishee.-Id.

tions cannot be impinged by writ of habeas corpus does not apply to application of child, coments or opportunity to prepare for appeal (Code mitted for delinquency, without notice to parCr. Proc. 1925, art. 1087).-Ex parte Tomlin, 298 S. W. 902.

accused in another county would be unavailing 27 (Mo.) Claim that sheriff could not arrest on habeas corpus by one in custody of proper officer of county where information was pending.

VI. PROCEEDINGS TO SUPPORT OR EN--Schwartz v. Dutro, 298 S. W. 769.

FORCE.

168 (Tex.Civ.App.) Proceeding to trial on garnishment suit prior to judgment in main suit was erroneous.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck, 298 S. W. 915.

ΙΧ.

Habeas corpus will not lie to release from custody one brought into state for trial on criminal charge, though forcibly and illegally.-Id.

30 (1) (Mo.) That no indictment or information was pending at term to which recognizance was returnable held not to authorize release on writ of habeas corpus after filing of valid inforOPERATION AND EFFECT OF GAR- mation.-Schwartz v. Dutro, 298 S. W. 769. NISHMENT, JUDGMENT, OR

PAYMENT.

232 (Tex.Civ.App.) Right of materialmen and laborers to fix liens and impound amount due could not be precluded by garnishment served before time given them by law had expired.-Pittsburgh Plate Glass Co. v. Beck, 298 S. W. 915.

GIFTS.

I. INTER VIVOS.

~29 (Ky.) Indorsing and delivering bank stock held to create valid gift.-Trevathan's Ex'r v. Dees' Ex'rs, 298 S. W. 975.

30(3) (Ky.) Having certificate of deposit issued payable to third party and delivering to third party with intention to transfer title hela valid gift.-Trevathan's Ex'r v. Dees' Ex'rs, 298 S. W. 975.

49(5) (Ky.) Evidence held to support chancellor's finding of gift of certificate of deposit. Trevathan's Ex'r v. Dees' Ex'rs, 298 S. W. 975.

GUARANTY.

III. DISCHARGE OF GUARANTOR. 56 (Ky.) Guarantor on original note held released by owner not requiring guaranty on renewal notes.-Trevathan's Ex'r v. Dees' Ex'rs, 298 S. W. 975.

GUARDIAN AND WARD.

III. CUSTODY AND CARE OF WARD'S
PERSON AND ESTATE.

28 (Ky.) Guardian's construction of will held not binding on ward as to election to ac

85(2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Introduction of warrant for arrest of alleged fugitive from justice makes prima facie case for respondent in habeas corpus proceedings.-Ex parte Wells, 298 S. W. 904.

Burden was on relator to show that demand of Governor of demanding state for his arrest as alleged fugitive from justice was not accompanied by copy of complaint duly certified.—Id.

92 (2) (Tex.Cr.App.) Court may go behind executive warrant issued in extradition proceedings to examine and review grounds on which Governor may have acted.-Ex parte Wells, 298 S. W. 904.

Question of guilt of alleged fugitive from justice cannot be tried in habeas corpus proceeding.—Id.

Claim that arrest of relator in extradition proceeding was attempt to collect debt should be addressed to executive department of state.-Id.

HIGHWAYS.

I. ESTABLISHMENT, ALTERATION, AND

DISCONTINUANCE.

(C) Alteration, Vacation, or Abandon

ment.

78 (Ark.) At common law, if highway is taken wholly from one man's property, on vacation, land reverts to original owner or his grantees.-Neil v. Independent Realty Co., 298 S. W. 363.

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

II. HIGHWAY DISTRICTS AND OFFICERS. Driving automobile while intoxicated on road90 (Tex.Civ.App.) Under Constitution, Leg-way within Fair Grounds held within statute islature could create road districts outright, de- prohibiting driving while intoxicated on "public fine their boundaries, and provide for organiza-186 (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony that witness highway" (Acts 1923, p. 200, § 1).-Id. tion and operation, or could have authorized smelled whisky, but could not tell who it was creation by commissioners' court; "under legislative provision" (Const. art. 3, 852).-Louisi-on, held admissible, as tending to prove driving automobile while intoxicated.-Riddle v. ana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. State, 298 S. W. 462. State, 298 S. W. 580. That Legislature made futile attempt to provide for creation of road districts did not exhaust its power over subject (Const. art. 3, 52).-Id.

Refusal of special charge directing verdict mobile while intoxicated, held proper.-Id. of not guilty, in prosecution for driving auto

HOMESTEAD.

(B) Persons Entitled.

Statutes validating road districts held not unconstitutional (Sp. Laws 1926 [1st Called Sess.] cc. 158, 160, 161; Acts 39th Leg. [1926] 1st I. NATURE, ACQUISITION, AND EXTENT. Called Sess. c. 17; Const. art. 1, § 16).—Id. Validation of road districts created by commissioners' courts and bonds issued by them relates back and includes assessment for 1925 (Sp. Laws 1926 [1st Called Sess.] cc. 158, 160, 161; Acts 39th Leg. [1926] 1st Called Sess. c. 17; Rev. St. 1925, arts. 726-784).—Id.

99 (Ark.) Road improvement pursuant to repealed law held void (Acts Sp. Sess. 1923, p. 42, § 26; Acts 1927, p. 18, § 2).-Huff v. Cunningham, 298 S. W. 340.

113(4) (Mo.) Whether gross and palpable mistake was made in measurement of work done under contract to grade highway for county held under evidence, for jury.-Wilson v. Buchanan County, 298 S. W. 842.

Instruction that receiving warrant marked "final payment" was not conclusive as to balance claimed from county held authorized by

18 (Mo.) Widower living alone without children or dependents held not "head of a family," within homestead exemption statute (Rev. St. 1919, § 5853).-Gammon v. McDowell, 298 S. W. 34.

20 (Mo.) Widower living alone without within homestead exemption statute (Rev. St. children or dependents held not "housekeeper." 1919, § 5853).-Gammon v. McDowell, 298 S. W. 34.

(D) Property Constituting Homestead.

74 (Tex.Civ.App.) Proceeds of crops raised on homestead held subject to garnishment, levied while crops were ungathered.-West v. U. S. Fidelity & Guaranty Co., 298 S. W. 652.

II. TRANSFER OR INCUMBRANCE. 122 (Tex.Civ.App.) Where owners are residing on homestead when mortgage is executed, mortgage is void, regardless of representations made to mortgagee (Const. art. 16, § 50).-Blanton v. Alexander, 298 S. W. 308.

HOMICIDE.

II. MURDER.

Refusal of instruction, that, if plaintiff moved more earth than computation indicated when accepting final payment, to find for county, held 11 (Ky.) Willful homicide with malice aforeproper.-Id.

IV. TAXES, ASSESSMENTS, AND WORK
ON HIGHWAYS.

128 (Tex.Civ.App.) Taxpayer must pay penalty for failure to pay assessment under invalid law, where assessment was later validated and taxpayer had waived right to object to payment of tax.-Louisiana Ry. & Nav. Co. v. State, 298 S. W. 462.

V. REGULATION AND USE FOR TRAVEL. (B) Use of Highway and Law of the Road.

172(1) (Ark.) General rules governing movement of automobiles except as changed by statute are same as those regulating other vehicles.-Hodges v. Smith, 298 S. W. 1023.

thought is felonious killing.-Parrott v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 675.

23(1) (Ark.) Distinction between murder in second degree and manslaughter is the presence of malice, expressed or implied.-Townsend v. State, 298 S. W. 3.

30(1) (Ky.) Coroner, who went to decedent's residence to execute warrant and participated in no unlawful acts, held not aider and abetter.-Stacy v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W.

696.

30(1) (Ky.) Defendant, not sharing criminal intent of one firing fatal shot, was entitled to instructed verdict of acquittal of aiding and abetting.-Whitt v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W.

1101.

III. MANSLAUGHTER.

32 Tex.Cr.App.) Defendant, convicted of manslaughter before statute abolished offense, held not entitled to benefit thereof, in view of another statute (Acts 40th Leg. [1927] c. 274; Acts 40th Leg. 1st Called Sess. [1927] c. 8).-O'Pry v. State, 298 S. W. 596.

176 (Ark.) Plaintiff, driving automobile, had duty to yield sufficient room for defendant to pass when he gave warning of intention.-Hodges v. Smith, 298 S. W. 1023. Automobile driver, overtaking and attempt-33 (Ky.) Willful slaying in sudden heat and ing to pass another, had duty to exercise ordinary care.-Id.

184(2) (Ark.) Evidence held to authorize finding that defendant, attempting to pass, ran his automobile into plaintiff's truck.-Hodges v. Smith, 298 S. W. 1023.

186 (Ark.) On trial for driving automobile while intoxicated, testimony that witness had told defendant some time before arrest not to continue "cutting up with his car" held admissible (Acts 1923, p. 200, § 1).-Canard v. State, 298 S. W. 24.

Any thoroughfare used for passage of public is "public highway," within statute prohibiting driving while intoxicated (Acts 1923, p. 200, § 1).-Id.

passion or sudden affray, without previous malice, is felonious killing, denominated voluntary manslaughter.-Parrott v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 675.

not

44 (Ark.) Where circumstances did warrant killer's belief of self danger, crime may be murder or manslaughter, though not committed in fit of passion.-Freeman v. State, 298 S. W. 333.

Where slayer acted in self-defense but was not free from blame, crime may be manslaughter.-Id.

78 (Ark.) Assault resulting in death, in absence of mitigation, justification, or excuse, will constitute "murder in second degree."Turner v. State, 298 S. W. 1028.

VII. EVIDENCE.

(A) Presumptions and Burden of Proof.

stances in which injuries resulting in death were inflicted.-Stevens v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 678.

146 (Ark.) Law implies malice, where kill-215 (1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Nothing inadmissible ing is with deadly weapon without mitigating had declarant testified, is admissible in dying circumstances, justification, or excuse.-Town- declaration.-Denson v. State, 298 S. W. 604. send v. State, 298 S. W. 3.

146 (Ark.) Law implies malice where killing is done with deadly weapon and no mitigating, justifying or excusing circumstances appear. Freeman v. State, 298 S. W. 333.

146 (Ky.) Malice may be presumed from wanton use of deadly weapons.—Fleenor v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 376.

(B) Admissibility in General.

158(4) (Ky.) In homicide prosecution, evidence that codefendant had made threat against deceased held competent.-Waters v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 1078.

160 (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony as to finding gun taken from owner's house and alleged to have been used by defendant in assault with intent to murder was admissible.-Clayton v. State, 298 S. W. 601.

163(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Admission of proof, on direct examination of state's witness, of specific basis for opinion of accused's bad reputation, held reversible error.-Howard v. State, 298 S. W. 587.

declaration that, when shot, he was not doing 215(4) (Ky.) Portion of deceased's dying anything, held admissible; not being conclusion. -Hunter v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 379.

215(4) (Ky.) In murder prosecution, addefendant shot him held error, where deceased mitting dying declarations of deceased that could not know as matter of fact who shot him. -Stevens v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 678.

215(4) (Tex.Cr.App.) Dying declaration that deceased had been followed all morning by defendant and his relatives held admissible as shorthand rendition of facts.-Denson v. State, 298 S. W. 604.

217 (Tex.Cr.App.) Any witness present may testify as to consciousness or sanity of one making dying declaration.-Denson v. State, 298 S. W. 604.

218 (Tex.Cr.App.) Court's ruling as to rationality of one making dying declaration must be appraised by how matter appeared when called on to act.-Denson v. State, 298 S. W. 604.

Deceased's rationality at time of dying declaration held for jury on conflicting testimony. |--Id. (E) Weight and Sufficiency.

166(2) (Ark.) Permitting evidence of quarrel between accused and third person on night prior to homicide, to show motive, held not error.-Townsend v. State, 298 S. W. 3. 166 (3) (Ark.) Testimony that defendant 231 (Ark.) Mental condition of accused at said it was none of decedent's business what time of killing must be judged from attendant defendant did at his place held admissible in circumstances.-Townsend v. State, 298 S. W. 3. trial for murdering officer searching premises 234(1) (Ky.) Evidence held sufficient to for whisky.-Robison v. State, 298 S. W. 349. sustain conviction of manslaughter.-Waters v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 1078.

173 (Tex.Cr.App.) Testimony as to finding gun and gun itself held properly admitted in 234 (5) (Mo.) Evidence held to make prima prosecution for assault with intent to kill.- facie case of conspiracy to kill deceased.-State Clayton v. State, 298 S. W. 601. v. Buckley, 298 S. W. 777.

174(1) (Ky.) Evidence for purpose of show-238 (Ky.) Evidence held to sustain convicing defendant's attempt to cast suspicion on an- tion for murder as against defense of drunkenother after homicide held admissible.-Haywood ness.-Fleenor v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 985.

376.

180 (Ky.) Evidence of drunkenness is ad-244(1) (Ark.) Evidence held to support missible to show absence of malice in commit- conviction of manslaughter as against plea of ting homicide.-Fleenor v. Commonwealth, 298 self-defense.-Freeman v. State, 298 S. W. 333. S. W. 376.

183 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence of defendant's suit and judgment against city, after assault on marshal, for wrongful impounding of stock, held inadmissible.-Wilheit v. State, 298 S. W. 426.

v. State, 298 S. W. 604.

244(1) (Ky.) Evidence held to sustain conviction for manslaughter, as against claim of self-defense.-Lee v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W.

1083.

v. State, 298 S. W. 426.

244(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to sup188 (7) (Tex.Cr.App.) State may introduce port verdict against defendant on issues of selfevidence of deceased's character to meet accused's evidence of threats against his life by defense in trial for assault to murder.--Wilheit deceased (Pen. Code 1925, art. 1258).-Denson245 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to supEvidence of deceased's reputation as peace-port verdict against defendant on issues of deful man held admissible to rebut evidence of fense of another in trial for assault to murder. his threats to kill defendant (Pen. Code 1925, -Wilheit v. State, 298 S. W. 426. art. 1258).-Id. 249 (Ky.) Evidence held to support conEvidence that deceased, whose general repu-viction of manslaughter by aiding and abetting tation was not in issue, was law-abiding citizen principal.-Kilbourn v. Commonwealth, 298 S. in other particulars than statute mentions, W. 1086. would be inadmissible to rebut evidence of his 250 (Ark.) Evidence held to sustain convicthreats to kill defendant (Pen. Code 1925, art. tion for manslaughter, with maximum of seven 1258).-Id. years' imprisonment as punishment (Crawford & Moses' Dig. § 2367).-Vaden v. State, 298 S. W. 323.

193 (Tex.Cr.App.) In homicide case, evidence held competent to show deceased had not purchased knife on day of killing.-Hunter v. State, 298 S. W. 429.

(C) Dying Declarations.

200 (Ky.) Declarations of deceased, made soon after he was shot and when he had no hope of recovery. held admissible.-Hunter v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 379.

250 (Ky.) Evidence held sufficient to support conviction of murder.-Stevens v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 678.

250 (Ky.) Conviction of manslaughter held not flagrantly against the evidence.-Turner v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 959.

250 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to support conviction of murder.-Ruffin v. State, 298 S. W. 287.

203 (3) (Tex.Cr.App.) Mother's testimony as to son's rationality and realization of im-250 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to suppending death held to warrant admission of his port conviction for murder.-Hassell v. State, dying declaration.-Denson v. State, 298 S. W. 298 S. W. 293. 604.

253(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to war214(3) (Ky.) Dying declarations are admis- rant conviction for murder with death pensible only when relating to manner and circum- | alty.—Vargas v. State, 298 S. W. 591.

For cases in Dec.Dig. & Am.Dig. Key-No.Series & Indexes see same topic and KEY-NUMBER

254 (Ark.) Evidence held sufficient to sus- 300 (8) (Tex.Cr.App.) Instruction on pro-
tain conviction of murder in second degree.- voking difficulty held not unwarranted, under
Townsend v. State, 298 S. W. 3.
evidence.-Hunter v. State, 298 S. W. 429.

255(2) (Ark.) Evidence held to sustain con-
viction for voluntary manslaughter.-Vaden v.
State, 298 S. W. 323.

255 (2) (Ky.) Evidence held to support con-
viction of voluntary manslaughter.-Haycraft v.
Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 374.

255(2) (Ky.) Conviction for voluntary man-
slaughter, where defendant shot occupant of au-
tomobile, held not against evidence.-Haywood
v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 985.

257(1) (Ky.) Evidence held to support con-
viction for shooting and wounding with intent to
kill. Sutton y. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 707.
257 (3) (Ark.) Evidence held to sustain
conviction for assault with intent to kill.-
Turner v. State, 298 S. W. 1028.

VIII. TRIAL.

(B) Questions for Jury.

300(9) (Ark.) Evidence held to warrant
instruction that defendant could not assert self-
defense, if he voluntarily entered into difficulty
with intent to kill.-Robison v. State, 298 S.
W. 349.

300(14) (Tex.Cr.App.) Charge that de-
ceased's threats would not justify killing, un-
less he manifested intent to execute threat, held
not erroneous as not affirmatively submitting
theory of apparent danger (Pen. Code 1925, art.
1258).-Ruffin v. State, 298 S. W. 287.

300(15) (Ky.) Failure to instruct self-de-
fense did not require defendant to flee to avoid
difficulty because he was on own premises held
not error.-Sutton v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W.
707.

304 (Ky.) In prosecution for murder, evi-
dence held to render failure to give instruction
on accidental shooting not error.-Haycraft v.
Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 374.

305 (Ky.) Evidence defendant and code-
fendant planned to haul coal through deceased's
lands at all costs justified submission of con-
spiracy to murder.-Claxton v. Commonwealth,
298 S. W. 702.

268 (Ark.) In homicide trial, whether the
"Vinson" stated in indictment as deceased was
the "Benson" proof showed to have been killed
was for jury.-Townsend v. State, 298 S. W. 3.
268 (Ky.) Evidence held sufficient to take
question of murder to jury.-Stevens v. Com-305 (Ky.) Evidence in murder trial held not
monwealth, 298 S. W. 678.
to justify instruction authorizing conviction as
268 (Ky.) Whether defendant aided and principal, aider, or abetter.-Cummings v. Com-
abetted in killing deceased with or without monwealth. 298 S. W. 943.
malice held for jury.-Claxton v. Common-305 (Ky.) Instruction as to conspiracy held
wealth, 298 S. W. 702.
erroneous as unauthorized by the evidence.--
Turner v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W 959.

268 (Ky.) Evidence of defendant's guilt
held for jury.-Spradlin v. Commonwealth, 298
S. W. 952.

268 (Tex.Cr.App.) In murder prosecution,
evidence held for jury.-Hoover v. State, 298 S.
W. 438.

268 (Tex.Cr.App.) Evidence held to war-
rant submission of charge of murder to jury.
-Easton v. State, 298 S. W. 594.

270 (Ky.) Whether drunken man killed de-
ceased with malice aforethought is for jury.-
Fleenor v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 376.

307 (1) (Ky.) Single instruction, embracing
both murder and voluntary manslaughter, held
proper.-Morgan v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W.
708.

IX. NEW TRIAL.

319 (Ky.) Alleged newly discovered evi-
dence of threat made by party shot week or
more before shooting held not sufficient to se-
cure new trial.-Sutton v. Commonwealth, 298
S. W. 707.

X. APPEAL AND ERROR.

276 (Ky.) Whether accused acted in self-
defense held for jury.-Waters v. Common-338(1) (Ky.) Admitting dying declaration
wealth, 298 S. W. 1078.
that defendant shot deceased held prejudicial
error, where evidence against defendant was
circumstantial.-Stevens v. Commonwealth, 298
S. W. 678.

281 (Ky.) Evidence of conspiracy to commit
murder, and its commission pursuant thereto,
held sufficient for jury.-Cummings v. Com-
monwealth, 298 S. W. 943.

282 (Ky.) Whether accused was guilty of
murder or voluntary manslaughter held for jury.
-Waters v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 1078.

(C) Instructions.

285 (Ky.) Word "feloniously" is unneces-
sary in instructions authorizing conviction in
homicide case.-Parrott v. Commonwealth, 298
S. W. 675.

294 (1) (Ky.) In prosecution for willful
murder, jury should not be instructed that
drunkenness mitigates offense.-Fleenor v. Com-
monwealth, 298 S. W. 376.

300 (3) (Ky.) Instruction indicating that
right to defend self by homicide depended on
danger defendant reasonably believed imminent
held proper.-Grant v. Commonwealth, 298 S.
W. 373.

300 (3) (Ky.) Instruction that, if parties
voluntarily entered into combat with intention
to shoot, kill, or do some great bodily harm,
defendant could not be acquitted because of
self-defense, held proper.-Sutton v. Common-
wealth, 298 S. W. 707.

338(1) (Tex.Cr.App.) Exculpatory state-
ment introduced by state of defendant under
13 years charged with assault with intent to
murder, that gun was accidentally discharged,
inured to his benefit.-Howard v. State, 298 S.
W. 587.

338(2) (Ky.) In homicide prosecution, ad-
mitting evidence that codefendant made threat
against deceased held not prejudicial.-Waters
v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 1078.

338(3) (Ky.) Admitting on murder trial de-
ceased's statement that "his head was killing
him," if error, held harmless, where nature of
wound was clearly shown by evidence.-Tipton
v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 990.

340 (3) (Ky.) Instruction relative to defend-
ant's having shot at tires, killing automobile's
occupant, held not prejudicial, since more fa-
vorable than facts warranted.-Haywood v.
Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 985.

340 (4) (Ký.) Instructions on murder, vol-
untary manslaughter and self-defense held not
reversible error as making guilt dependent on
what both defendants did, in view of other in-
structions and acquittal of one defendant.-
Parrott v. Commonwealth, 298 S. W. 675.

340 (4) (Ky.) Instruction submitting con-
spiracy to murder, if error, held harmless, where
conviction was for manslaughter only and pun-
ishment light.-Claxton v. Commonwealth, 298
S. W. 702.

300 (7) (Tex.Cr.App.) Where defendant
shot deceased who was unarmed, instruction on
right to arm, with determination to shoot to re-
pel attack, held properly refused.-Yancy v.
State, 298 S. W. 908.
Where deceased was unarmed, instruction un-341 (Ky.) Where defendant shot and clubbed
der statute defining presumption arising from deceased, failure to give involuntary manslaugh-
use of deadly weapon by person slain held prop- ter instruction on clubbing, if error, held harm-
erly refused (Pen. Code 1925, art. 1223).-Id. less under evidence showing that deceased died