Pemberton v. State, 117 S.W. 837 (Tex. Crim. 1909)

The State proved by J. S. Newman that he examined appellant's shotgun the next day after the shooting occurred; that the same showed to have been recently fired, to which [*468] counsel for appellant objected because it was a conclusion and an inference of the witness and prejudicial to appellant, and invaded the province of the jury, in that the facts upon which the witness based said inference and conclusion should have been stated and the jury have been allowed to draw their own conclusion. The record shows that the witness qualified to testify and the testimony was admissible.