Bryant v. State, Nos. 45947

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Writing for the CourtDOUGLAS; MORRISON
Citation492 S.W.2d 947
PartiesWalter Marion BRYANT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. to 45949.
Docket NumberNos. 45947
Decision Date04 April 1973

Page 947

492 S.W.2d 947
Walter Marion BRYANT, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Nos. 45947 to 45949.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
April 4, 1973.
Rehearing Denied May 1, 1973.

Malcolm Dade, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Mike G. McCollum, Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., and Robert A. Huttash, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

DOUGLAS, Judge.

These are appeals from three convictions for the sale of heroin. The jury assessed punishment in each case at thirty years.

The appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient because it was not shown that the amount of heroin found in the capsules he sold was of an amount which would have an effect on a human being.

Dr. Martin T. Mason's testimony shows that the capsules which were shown to have been sold by appellant contained from .4 to 1.5 milligrams of active heroin.

In Alaniz v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 458 S.W.2d 813, it was contended that the fragments or traces of marihuana found in the pockets of Alaniz and his companion were not proved to be of sufficient quantity or strength to put to its common use of smoking. This Court, in overruling Alaniz' contention, held that it was not necessary for the State to prove that there was sufficient quantity of marihuana of such strength in the fragments found on their persons that could be smoked.

Appellant relies on Pelham v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 226, 298 S.W.2d 171, and Greer v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 377, 292 S.W.2d 122, in support of his contention. This Court has held that the reasoning of Greer and Pelham is inapplicable to prosecutions for the sale of a narcotics drug. Reyes v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d 373.

The evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.

Next, appellant contends that the trial court erred when it failed to charge on the converse of the State's theory of the case and the defense of alibi.

The record reflects that no objection was made to the court's charge nor was a written request for a special charge submitted to the court as required by Article 36.14, Vernon's

Page 948

Ann.C.C.P. Appellant cannot now complain. Gray v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 246.

No reversible error being shown, the judgment is affirmed.

MORRISON, J., dissents.

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 practice notes
  • Lejeune v. State, No. 49404
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • July 14, 1976
    ...drug was involved the quantity of the narcotic sold is irrelevant. Carter v. State, 480 S.W.2d 735 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). Both the possession and the delivery of marihuana require the element of 'knowingly or intentionally.' The rationale for i......
  • Whitson v. State, No. 46192
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • June 13, 1973
    ...Tex.Cr.App., 379 S.W.2d 904; Monroe v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 465 S.W.2d 757; Woods v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 479 S.W.2d 952; Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 Appellant argues that the court committed fundamental reversible error in defining 'reasonable doubt' as being 'a doubt which based upon th......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 46129
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • February 27, 1974
    ...has been shown, and the quantity of the drug found is irrelevant. Carter v. State, 480 S.W.2d 735 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 Such is not the situation in the case at hand. A chemist testified that an analysis of the nine seeds showed their total weight to be .19 gram......
3 cases
  • Lejeune v. State, No. 49404
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • July 14, 1976
    ...drug was involved the quantity of the narcotic sold is irrelevant. Carter v. State, 480 S.W.2d 735 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). Both the possession and the delivery of marihuana require the element of 'knowingly or intentionally.' The rationale for i......
  • Whitson v. State, No. 46192
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • June 13, 1973
    ...Tex.Cr.App., 379 S.W.2d 904; Monroe v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 465 S.W.2d 757; Woods v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 479 S.W.2d 952; Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 Appellant argues that the court committed fundamental reversible error in defining 'reasonable doubt' as being 'a doubt which based upon th......
  • Taylor v. State, No. 46129
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
    • February 27, 1974
    ...has been shown, and the quantity of the drug found is irrelevant. Carter v. State, 480 S.W.2d 735 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bryant v. State, 492 S.W.2d 947 Such is not the situation in the case at hand. A chemist testified that an analysis of the nine seeds showed their total weight to be .19 gram......

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