-
I am not in accord with the majority in holding that appellant is entitled to bail. The case has been before this court on its merits, Gragg v. State,
186 S.W.2d 243 . The facts are the same. I was of the opinion then that the circumstances were sufficient to support the conviction, and so expressed myself. I have not changed my position. Inasmuch as the majority in that appeal has held the evidence sufficient, and inasmuch as a Dallas County jury has once given him the death penalty under the evidence in the case, I am unable to understand how we could now hold that his guilt is not evident and that a jury may not give him the death penalty when the case is tried. If the evidence is sufficient, the circumstance of a man taking the life of his wife and his step-son for the purposes clearly developed *Page 13 by the evidence precludes the possibility of any mitigating circumstance.Neither am I able to see why a bond of Five Thousand Dollars in each case should be fixed. There is no evidence in this appeal which will justify so small a bond.
I respectfully dissent from my associates in the conclusion which they have reached and am unable to join in the approval of the foregoing opinion.
Document Info
Docket Number: No. 23278.
Judges: Krueger, Beauchamp
Filed Date: 12/12/1945
Precedential Status: Precedential
Modified Date: 11/15/2024