Cabrera v. State, 38473
| Decision Date | 03 November 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 38473,38473 |
| Parties | Ramiro M. CABRERA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
M. Gabriel Nahas, Jr., King C. Haynie, Houston (on appeal only), for appellant.
Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally, Charles E. Bonney and Joe S. Maida, III, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DICE, Commissioner.
Appellant was convicted for the offense of unlawful possession of heroin and his punishment was assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for eight years.
At the trial, narcotics officer R. Y. Garcia, of the Houston police department, testified that on the night in question he observed the appellant, at approximately 8:25 p. m., driving his 1960 Pontiac automobile west on Quitman Street and that he proceeded to follow appellant and observe him get out of his car and place a small bottle by a highway marker. The officer stated that he then drove to the highway marker and picked up the bottle, which the proof showed contained heroin. He then followed appellant and stopped him as he was driving on Quitman at Cochran Street.
While Officer Garcia was testifying on direct examination, certain questions were propounded to him, and the following transpired:
'Mr. Nahas: I object to it as being hearsay and ask that it be stricken and ask that the jury be instructed to disregard it.
'The Court: Overruled.
'Mr. Nahas: Note my exception.
'Mr. Nahas: Your Honor, I object to it again as hearsay and move that it be stricken.
'The Court: Overruled.
'Mr. Nahas: Note my exception.'
The testimony elicited from Officer Garcia, over appellant's timely objection, as to the information he had received was clearly hearsay any should not have been admitted before the jury.
Such testimony was reasonably calculated to prejudice the rights of appellant, especially in view of his absolute denial--while testifying as a witness in his own behalf--that he had ever seen the bottle or placed it by the highway marker. The admission of such testimony presents reversible...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Lacy v. State, 40821
...off, out there.' Wood v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 319, 313 S.W.2d 615, McCormick v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 484, 316 S.W.2d 736, Cabrera v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 395 S.W.2d 34, Hodge v. State, 214 S.W.2d 469, and Rosales v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 399 S.W.2d 541, are relied upon by appellant in support ......
-
Roberts v. State
...by the State as original evidence, inadmissible before the jury. Barber v. State, 481 S.W.2d 812 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Cabrera v. State, 395 S.W.2d 34 (Tex.Cr.App.1965); Wood v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 319, 313 S.W.2d 615 (1958). If the appellant wishes to raise issues of fact before a jury to ob......
-
Hicks v. State
...jury, the hearsay statements of an informant should not be admitted. Mejia v. State, 505 S.W.2d 532 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Cabrera v. State, 395 S.W.2d 34 (Tex.Cr.App.1965). But in this case, appellant's counsel brought the issue of probable cause before the jury by his repeated questioning of ......
-
Dyche v. State, 45592
...could be found at 4645 Bryan Street, Apt. E, and used the information to secure a search warrant. Appellant cites Cabrera v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 395 S.W.2d 34, and Albitez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 461 S.W.2d 609, as authority. This Court reversed Cabrera, supra, because the hearsay testimony ......