Ballew v. State, 42581
| Decision Date | 18 March 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 42581,42581 |
| Parties | Jerry Wayne BALLEW, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Jake C. Cook, Fort Worth, court-appointed on appeal only, for appellant.
Frank Coffey, Dist. Atty., Ben H. Tompkins, Otto Stephani, Jr., and Truman Power, Asst. Dist. Attys., Fort Worth, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for burglary; the punishment, seven years.
The record reflects that late at night a burglar alarm was set off at a warehouse in Fort Worth. A serviceman from the silent alarm system and policement went to the warehouse, found a window broken, the petty cash box on a table and the appellant hiding inside.
In the first ground of error, it is contended that the date of the burglary was not established, because the witness W. L. Kingston from the security company did not testify that the offense occurred on January 3, 1969.
Kingston testified that he received the alarm on that date and went to the McKesson-Robbins Warehouse, and that State's Exhibit No. 2 actually represented the broken window on the night of January 3, 1969. Officer Smith, a 'K--9' patrol officer, testified that on January 3, 1969, he went to the warehouse with a dog which helped find the appellant hiding behind some whiskey cases. Other witnesses testified that they saw appellant in the warehouse that night. The first ground of error is overruled.
In the second ground of error, appellant contends that the court erred in overruling an objection to a leading question. When the witness Barker, warehouse manager and foreman, was testifying, the following transpired:
Appellant's counsel then objected that the question was leading, and the objection was overruled.
The question complained of was not answered, and it was not leading.
'If the question asked does not suggest the answer desired it is not a leading question.' 1 Branch's Ann.P.C.2d, Sec. 179, p. 187. 1 The second ground of error is overruled.
In the third ground of error, complaint is made that the court permitted Officer Wright to testify at the penalty stage of the trial that appellant's reputation as a peaceable law-abiding citizen was bad, because it was based on information obtained after appellant had been arrested.
The testimony of Officer Wright shows that he did not know appellant until after he was arrested.
This Court has held that a witness who has known the defendant only after the arrest may testify concerning the defendant's reputation up to and including the date of the trial. Wilson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 434 S.W.2d 873, and Broadway v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 418 S.W.2d 679. No error is shown; the third ground of error is overruled.
The fourth ground of error is as follows: 'The trial court erred in admitting appellant's prior conviction in Oklahoma.'
This presents nothing for...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Simmons v. State
...to the date of the trial. Wright v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 491 S.W.2d 936; Frison v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 473 S.W.2d 479; Ballew v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 452 S.W.2d 460; Broadway v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 418 S.W.2d The appellant apparently was unwilling to inquire of his witnesses concerning his re......
-
Frison v. State
...time of the trial. See also Fletcher v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 437 S.W.2d 849; Glenn v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 442 S.W.2d 360; Ballew v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 452 S.W.2d 460; Chamberlain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 453 S.W.2d The concurring opinion in Broadway, supra, by Judge Morrison, took the positio......
-
Saenz v. State, No. 13-06-076-CR (Tex. App. 4/2/2009)
...question suggests an answer; if a question does not suggest an answer it is not leading. See Tex. R. Evid. 611; Bellew v. State, 452 S.W.2d 460, 461 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). What answer was the State suggesting to the witness Rosales, that he did kill Rodriguez or that he did not? Essentiall......
-
Azhar v. Choudhri
... ... See Tex ... Fam. Code § 1.101 ("[E]very marriage entered into ... in this state is presumed to be valid unless expressly made ... void by Chapter 6 or unless expressly made ... ...