Brown v. State, 39338
| Decision Date | 09 March 1966 |
| Docket Number | No. 39338,39338 |
| Citation | 401 S.W.2d 251 |
| Parties | Johnny Mack BROWN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Dan R. McCormack, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Kenneth Blassingame, John Nelms and W. John Allison, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is robbery; the punishment, 35 years.
The indictment alleged the robbery of Celia Garcia and the taking of $852.56 current money of the United States of America. The allegation of the indictment 'by using and exhibiting a firearm, to-wit, a gun' was deleted upon motion of the state, and the case went to trial before a jury on the remaining part of the indictment to which appellant's plea was not guilty.
The state's evidence shows that the robbery was committed at about 1 o'clock P.M. at the office of a loan company of which Celia Garcia was part owner and manager.
Ivery Travenio Williams was identified by Celia Garcia and by Otis Webster, a customer who came to the office to pay a bill while the robbery was being committed, as the person who at gun point required Mrs. Garcia to take the money out of a cash drawer and put it in a sack.
Appellant was identified by Otis Webster as the man who prevented his leaving the office by pointing a pistol at him.
The only other eye witness to the robbery was Celia Garcia's married sister who was pregnant at the time. She did not testify.
The state's evidence shows that Williams handed the sack of money to appellant and they exchanged pistols. Before leaving with the money, Mrs. Garcia's sister, the customer Webster, and later Mrs. Garcia, were put in the bathroom.
Appellant testified that he was not guilty of the robbery and had never been to the Time Finance Company in his life. His testimony and that of his witnesses was to the effect that he played dominoes all day on September 8, 1964, at his home.
The court charged the jury on the defense of alibi. It is evident from their verdict that the jury chose to believe the witnesses for the state.
Appellant's contention that the evidence is insufficient to sustain the conviction is overruled.
Appellant's remaining grounds for reversal relate to the court's refusal to allow Ivery Traveno Williams to testify as a witness in appellant's behalf.
The record shows that Williams had been indicted, tried and convicted for the same robbery and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Zerschausky, 40133
...upon Art. 711, C.C.P. then in effect, violated Washington's rights under the Sixth and Fourteenth Amendments. In Brown v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 401 S.W.2d 251, as well as in Washington, supra, we held that Art. 711 C.C.P. (1925) and Art. 82 P.C. which provides that charged As principals canno......
-
Bonner v. Beto
...Penal Code. Not, however, until the recent cases of Washington v. State (Tex.Crim.App. 1966) 400 S.W.2d 756, and Brown v. State, (Tex.Crim.App.1966) 401 S.W.2d 251 has the constitutionality of Articles 711 Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. and 82 Vernon's Ann.P.C. been attacked. The Washington court in r......