Barrett v. State
Decision Date | 01 March 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 54330,54330 |
Citation | 547 S.W.2d 604 |
Parties | Roger Paul BARRETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appellant was convicted of aggravated kidnapping. The conviction followed appellant's guilty plea before the court, a jury having been waived. Punishment was assessed at imprisonment for fifteen (15) years and one (1) day, and this appeal followed.
The indictment consisted of two counts, each purporting to charge the offense of aggravated kidnapping. 1 At the conclusion of the evidence, the court found appellant guilty without designating under which count of the indictment that determination was made. 2 Since we find the evidence insufficient to sustain a conviction under either count, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded.
The evidence to support the guilty plea was stipulated. 3 The sole evidence of the facts of the case was that contained in the written affidavit of Trooper Keith Pherigo of the Texas Highway Patrol. This affidavit detailed the events immediately before and after the attack on and abduction of Pherigo by three men and one woman at the Scurry County Courthouse on December 8, 1975. However, appellant is nowhere identified as one of the attackers or abductors; and, there is no other evidence in the record to connect appellant with the attack on Pherigo or his abduction.
Art. 1.15, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., mandates that, in a non-jury, non-capital felony trial, "it shall be necessary for the State to introduce evidence into the record showing the guilt of the defendant . . . ." (Emphasis supplied.) This has long been true even in cases where the guilty plea was before the court. In Edwards v. State, 463 S.W.2d 733 (Tex.Cr.App.1971), this court wrote:
See also Martin v. State, 491 S.W.2d 421 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Salinas v. State, 478 S.W.2d 538 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Fitzsimmons v. State, 471 S.W.2d 858 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Rodriquez v. State, 442 S.W.2d 376 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); Crawford v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 554, 278 S.W.2d 845 (1955); Hancock v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 568, 150 S.W.2d 385 (1941); Howell v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 627, 146 S.W.2d 747 (1941); Franklin v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 251, 144 S.W.2d 581 (1940); Spivey v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 107, 143 S.W.2d 386 (1940).
Since the evidence in the instant case is insufficient to support the judgment, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
1 In view of our disposition of this case, we find it unnecessary to discuss whether either or both counts of the indictment properly alleged the offense of aggravated kidnapping. Compare Sec. 20.04, New Texas Penal Code ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Benavides v. State, 04-81-00465-CR
...165 S.W.2d 460. Accord Dinnery v. State, 592 S.W.2d 343, 351 (Tex.Cr.App.1980) (on rehearing on court's own motion); Barrett v. State, 547 S.W.2d 604, 605 (Tex.Cr.App.1977) (and citations therein); Jones v. State, 505 S.W.2d 903, 907 The burden is upon the State to establish all essential e......
-
Oliver v. State
...here, as being the person who was in your store on that day, I believe you said that, didn't you? "A. I sure did." In Barrett v. State, 547 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1977), we reversed the defendant's conviction, based on his guilty plea, because of the lack of an affirmative identification of......
-
Barrientes v. State
...However, he relies on Barrett v. State in which the defendant pled guilty but did not confess by stipulation. See 547 S.W.2d 604, 604-05 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977). Under Menefee, the State would be required to produce evidence substantiating the plea in such a situation. See 287 S.W.3d at 13. ......
-
James v. State
...A guilty plea alone will not support a conviction in a bench trial without evidence showing the defendants' guilt. Barrett v. State, 547 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Tex.Code Crim.Pro.Ann. art. 1.15 (Vernon 1977). For two reasons, we believe there was sufficient evidence to support the con......