"No. 37,900 In the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas at Austin, Texas. Jack Ruby (Jack Rubenstein), Appellant vs. The State of Texas, Appellee. On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 3 of Dallas County, Texas."
"Joe H. Tonahill, Tonahill Building, Jasper, Texas; Emmett Colvin, Jr., 1115 Fidelity Building, 1000 Main Street, Dallas, Texas. Appearing as amicus curiae and attorneys of Record for appellant."
This copy includes two different photocopies of page 23 in the first appendix.
Additional description and context: Brief: Jack Ruby (Rubenstein) Appellant vs. the State of Texas Appellee. Dated June 15, 1966, only two days after Ruby was declared sane at his sanity hearing, this appeal was written and filed by Joe Tonahill and Emmit Colvin.
The brief details all the ways that the defense lawyers believed the judge and prosecution failed to provide Jack Ruby a fair trial. Tonahill and Colvin described every objection in detail and in summary, ultimately requesting that the guilty verdict passed on Ruby at his murder trial in 1964 be overturned.
This photocopy totals 269 pages and includes copies of Exhibits A - D:
Exhibit A - Pages 177 - 198 of The Kennedy Assassination and the American Public: Social Communication in Crisis, edited by Bradley S. Greenberg and Edwin B. Parker, published by Stanford University Press, 1965. The excerpt is a chapter titled, "Reactions to the Assassination in Dallas," by Charles M. Bonjean, Richard J. Hill, and Harry W. Martin.
Exhibit B - Seven pages of an article from Journalism Quarterly, Vol. 41, No. 3 (Summer 1964), University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, (c) 1964. The article is titled, "News Diffusion: A Test of the Regularity Hypothesis," by Richard J. Hill and Charles M. Bonjean.
Exhibit C - An outline that details why Judge Joe B. Brown was disqualified, why the appellant was denied due process, and why the conviction was void.
Exhibit D - Photocopies of two letters from Judge Brown. The first letter, addressed to Sam Stewart, is a single page typed on white letterhead paper, and is dated March 12, 1965. In it, Judge Brown writes his book editor to explain why more progress has not been made on the book about Jack Ruby and the Ruby trial due to personal schedules and conflicts as well as the defendant appealing his verdict to the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. Brown asks for "indulgence and patience" from Mr. Stewart because "we may have a much, much better book than we had anticipated; but I do not want to put myself in the position of being disqualified." The second letter, dated June 21, 1965, is addressed to Judge Dallas A. Blankenship at the First Administrative Judicial District in Dallas, Texas. In it, Judge Brown recuses himself "from any further duty in the case styled The State of Texas vs. Jack Ruby."
The Sixth Floor Museum at Dealey Plaza also publishes this record online: https://emuseum.jfk.org/objects/41828
Place Name coordinates. (May be approximate.)
Place Name coordinates. (May be approximate.)
