![]() "The Clerk of this Court is hereby directed to quote this fiat and embody the same in the appropriate writ. to show cause why a temporary injunction should not issue during the pendency of this suit. "That NOTICE forthwith issue to the Defendant, requiring him to appear before this Honorable Court on the 25th day of July, 1969, at 3:00 P.M. 14th Street, Austin, Texas, and from going around Plaintiff at her place of employment, or wherever she may be, and from bothering, molesting or in any manner interferring with Plaintiff and "It is, therefore, ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by the Court that the Defendant, Lee Brooks, be, and he is hereby restrained from going around or upon Plaintiff's residence at 1014 E. "It appearing to the Court, after hearing and due consideration, that probable harm and injury may result to Plaintiff at the hands of the Defendant, unless he is restrained as prayed for in Plaintiff's application The temporary restraining order entered on the same day reads in part as follows: The divorce petition filed July 15, 1969, which was not admitted before the jury but which is made a part of this record reflects a prayer that a temporary restraining order without notice to the defendant (the appellant herein) be issued. The temporary restraining order was admitted and read to the jury by the deputy district *270 clerk. The objection to such documents was sustained but the State was permitted to show the deceased had filed for divorce and had sought a temporary restraining order.Īt the close of the State's rebuttal evidence the same documents were again offered into evidence over objection. It appears that at the close of the State's case in chief the prosecution offered the divorce petition and the temporary restraining order. He testified she voluntarily got in his car at the police station and that while they were driving away he sought to place the pistol under the seat that she grabbed the pistol and while they "tussled" over it, the pistol accidentally discharged striking his wife. Testifying in his own behalf the appellant acknowledged he and his wife had separated on July 14, 1969, but related they had discussed reconciliation and that she had told him on the phone earlier in the evening in question she was coming home. The testimony of other police officers was essentially the same as Officer Bruce's. A pistol was found on the front seat of his car and when it was retrieved Officer Bruce noted the deceased bleeding from a neck wound. the appellant stopped his car and proceeded to run. Officer Ronald Bruce testified that after a chase at 70-90 m. The officers followed the appellant and the deceased. He drove off.Īt this juncture two officers drove up and Walker told them what had transpired. He forced the deceased to get into his car and threatened to kill her. Then the appellant, her estranged husband, drove up and got out of his car and put a gun in his pocket. Her brother, Arelious Walker, followed her in his car to the Austin Police Station parking lot. Shortly after arriving at home she received a phone call, got in her car and left. ![]() At the time she lived at her mother's house at 705 E. The State's evidence reflects that the deceased, Oreander Brooks, wife of the appellant, arrived home from work around 1:30 a. Appellant contends the contents of the order were hearsay and inadmissible for any purpose, denied him the right of confrontation of witnesses and constituted an ex parte judicial finding in another legal action of certain facts highly prejudicial to him. This appeal arises out of a murder conviction where the penalty assessed by the jury was death.Īppellant initially complains of the introduction into evidence at the guilty state of the trial, over objection, of a temporary restraining order entered in a pending divorce suit between the appellant and the deceased on July 15, 1969, which order was not served upon the appellant until some 9 hours after the alleged killing. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State. Atty., Herman Gotcher, Sykes, Houston and Lawrence Wells, Asst. *269 Jones, Blakeslee, Minton, Burton & Fitzgerald, Austin, for appellant.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |