Artell v. State, No. 35418

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Writing for the CourtMORRISON; McDONALD
Citation372 S.W.2d 944,84 S.Ct. 439
PartiesPaul Doyle ARTELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Docket NumberNo. 35418
Decision Date13 March 1963

Page 944

372 S.W.2d 944
Paul Doyle ARTELL, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 35418.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
March 13, 1963.
Rehearing Denied April 24, 1963.
Certiorari Denied Dec. 16, 1963.
See 84 S.Ct. 439.

Clyde W. Woody, Houston, for appellant.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally and Daniel P. Ryan, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is carrying a pistol; the punishment, 60 days in jail.

Page 945

Officer Garcia of the narcotics division of the Houston police testified that on the day in question he received information by telephone from a reliable and credible person that appellant could be found in the 1600 block of Houston Avenue in a 1960 green Chevrolet, License number SR 6700, and that he had a quantity of narcotics in his possession; that he, in company with Officer Strickland and others, proceeded at once to said location, and as he approached the automobile which had been described to him he observed appellant, who was seated therein alone, 'reaching under the front seat directly behind him.' He identified himself as an officer, reached under the seat and pulled out a black holster that contained a .38 caliber Smith & Wesson revolver. Appellant was then carried to the station, and Officer Strickland took charge of the weapon and made out the offense report. Appellant did not testify or offer any evidence in his own behalf, and we find the evidence sufficient to support the conviction.

Appellant's attack upon the legality of the search is overruled upon authority of French v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 48, 284 S.W.2d 359; Sanders v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 293, 312 S.W.2d 640; Slaughter v. State, 314 S.W.2d 92; Bridges v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 556, 316 S.W.2d 757; Baray v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 456, 321 S.W.2d 87; McCall v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 559, 322 S.W.2d 291; and Leal v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 222, 332 S.W.2d 729.

The court did not err in declining to require Officer Garcia to name his informer. Bridges v. State, supra, and Sikes v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 334 S.W.2d 440. This is especially so since there is no showing that the informant took any material part in bringing about the offense, was present when it occurred or might be a material witness as to whether or not accused committed the offense. Anno. 76 A.L.R.2d 262, sec. 20, p. 307.

The sole remaining question which requires discussion is the refusal of the trial court to permit appellant to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
36 practice notes
  • Birnbaum v. Trussell, No. 87
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • December 28, 1966
    ...on Character & Fitness, 373 U.S. 96, 104-105, 83 S.Ct. 1175, 10 L.Ed.2d 224 (1963), motion for clarification denied 375 U.S. 950, 84 S.Ct. 439, 11 L.Ed. 312 (1963); Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1, 18-19, 58 S.Ct. 773, 776, 82 L.Ed. 1129 (1938) ("The right to a hearing embraces * * * a ......
  • Phillips v. Fisher, No. 77-4145.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • October 12, 1977
    ...1963); Skolnick v. Spolar, 317 F.2d 857, 859 (7th Cir.), cert. den. 375 U.S. 904, 84 S.Ct. 195, 11 L.Ed.2d 145, reh. den. 375 U.S. 960, 84 S.Ct. 439, 11 L.Ed.2d 318 (1963); Moffett v. Commerce Trust Co., 187 F.2d 242, 248, 249 (8th Cir. 1951); Bottone v. Lindsley, 170 F.2d 705, 707 (10th Ci......
  • Robertson v. State, No. 71224
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • December 8, 1993
    ...The "Gaskin Rule" only applied where the writings were prepared by the witness. White v. State, 478 S.W.2d at 511, n. 8; Artell v. State, 372 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Crim.App.1963). Additionally, the scope of discovery and introduction of documents under the "Gaskin Rule" was limited to cross-exami......
  • Mendoza v. State, No. 53312
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • June 8, 1977
    ...must have been Page 448 made by the State's witness himself. Gilbreath v. State, 500 S.W.2d 527 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Artell v. State, 372 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1963). Additionally, the accused must make an effort to properly incorporate in the appellate record the statement or report he clai......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
36 cases
  • Birnbaum v. Trussell, No. 87
    • United States
    • U.S. Court of Appeals — Second Circuit
    • December 28, 1966
    ...on Character & Fitness, 373 U.S. 96, 104-105, 83 S.Ct. 1175, 10 L.Ed.2d 224 (1963), motion for clarification denied 375 U.S. 950, 84 S.Ct. 439, 11 L.Ed. 312 (1963); Morgan v. United States, 304 U.S. 1, 18-19, 58 S.Ct. 773, 776, 82 L.Ed. 1129 (1938) ("The right to a hearing embraces * * * a ......
  • Phillips v. Fisher, No. 77-4145.
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. United States District Courts. 10th Circuit. District of Kansas
    • October 12, 1977
    ...1963); Skolnick v. Spolar, 317 F.2d 857, 859 (7th Cir.), cert. den. 375 U.S. 904, 84 S.Ct. 195, 11 L.Ed.2d 145, reh. den. 375 U.S. 960, 84 S.Ct. 439, 11 L.Ed.2d 318 (1963); Moffett v. Commerce Trust Co., 187 F.2d 242, 248, 249 (8th Cir. 1951); Bottone v. Lindsley, 170 F.2d 705, 707 (10th Ci......
  • Robertson v. State, No. 71224
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • December 8, 1993
    ...The "Gaskin Rule" only applied where the writings were prepared by the witness. White v. State, 478 S.W.2d at 511, n. 8; Artell v. State, 372 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Crim.App.1963). Additionally, the scope of discovery and introduction of documents under the "Gaskin Rule" was limited to cross-exami......
  • Mendoza v. State, No. 53312
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • June 8, 1977
    ...must have been Page 448 made by the State's witness himself. Gilbreath v. State, 500 S.W.2d 527 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Artell v. State, 372 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1963). Additionally, the accused must make an effort to properly incorporate in the appellate record the statement or report he clai......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT