Campbell v. State, s. 49744

Decision Date16 July 1975
Docket Number49745,Nos. 49744,s. 49744
PartiesEdward Alexander CAMPBELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. Thomas Wayne SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Jim D. Lovett, Clarksville, for appellant.

Jim D. vollers, State's Atty. and David S. McAngus, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is assault with intent to murder; the punishment as to each appellant, twenty years.

We are met at the outset with the appellants' contention that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions in this admittedly circumstantial evidence case. A detailed discussion of the facts will be necessary.

The witness Glass, a resident of a rural area of Red River County, while on his way to church about 5 p.m. on December 1, passed a light or white colored automobile going in the opposite direction, which he thought to be 'maybe a 1964 model Rambler,' driving fast on a country road. He proceeded three-quarters of a mile, and there observed Peek (the injured party) lying in the bar ditch. An examination revealed that Peek had sustained injuries to the left side of his head. 'A pretty good streak of blood going across the blacktop' of the road was observed by Glass. It was his opinion that no vehicle had crossed this 'streak of blood' other than his automobile. A hatchet bearing signs of blood on it was found approximately 20 feet from Peek. Peek was unconscious and wore no shoes. The findings at the scene were corroborated by the investigating officers. The ambulance attendant testified that he took Peek to Clarksville and then to Parkland Hospital in Dallas.

Peek's wife testified that he left home at about 11 o'clock in the morning of December 1, on his way to a dog trade in Canton, and that he had been drinking. She said that he was traveling in a 'white Rambler' automobile. She next saw her husband at 2 a.m. on December 2, in the intensive care unit of Parkland Hospital. She further related that he was severely injured and had been unable to carry on a conversation, use his right hand or do any work since that time.

Peek testified, with extreme difficulty and in answer to leading questions, that he left home on the day in question and that he picked up two hitchhikers, and when asked whether they were men or women, he pointed in the court room and answered, 'Right there'. When State's counsel asked, 'these two men right over there?' Peek answered, 'Yeah'. He was, however, unable to state where he picked up the hitchhikers, where the three of them went or how he received his injury.

Officer Rice of the Mesquite Police Department testified that a few minutes past 1:00 a.m. on December 2 he stopped a white 1966 Rambler on an interstate loop near Dallas for speeding. He subsequently arrested appellant Campbell, the driver of the car, for driving while intoxicated, and he had appellant Smith drive the vehicle back to the Mesquite Police Headquarters. After running a license check, Rice determined that the license on the Rambler actually belonged to a Ford registered to a person bearing the same name as one of the appellants and that the Rambler should have had a license registered to one Paul Yates. He later released Campbell and Smith to the custody of the Red River County Sheriff's Department.

Sheriff M. E. McGuire of Red River County testified, in addition to his findings at the scene which were substantially the same as those testified to by the witness Glass, that when appellants were brought to the Red River County Jail Campbell had on a pair of tan cowboy boots. This was corroborated by the testimony of Deputy Sheriff J. D. Mitchell. These boots were identified by Mrs. Peek as belonging to her husband and as being worn by him when he left home on the day of the offense.

Mrs. Peek also identified the hatchet found at the scene as belonging to her husband and that he usually carried it in his automobile. She stated that her husband had purchased the automobile from a used car lot some two or three months prior to the day in question.

Appellant relies solely upon Culmore v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 447 S.W.2d 915, which was reversed because the evidence was not sufficient to show that Culmore exercised any control over the contraband found in the house where he was arrested.

We have concluded that the evidence is sufficient.

In his second ground of error appellant complains that the trial court abused its discretion and erred in permitting Deputy Sheriff J. D. Mitchell to testify for the State after he had heard much of the other evidence presented in the case.

The record indicates that at the start of the trial on the merits a list of witnesses to be called was read by the State. This list did not include the name of Mitchell. After the witnesses on the list were sworn, appellants invoked the rule. When Mitchell was called to testify, appellants objected on the grounds that the rule had been invoked, and since Mitchell had been in the court room for most of the presentation of the State's case, he should not be permitted to testify. The objection was overruled. The record reflects that Mitchell had the appellants in custody and that was his reason for being in the court room. In Green v. State, 159...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • Hawkins v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 20 Julio 1983
    ...of a murder, including a description of the body is admissible to throw light on the transaction and reveal its general nature. Campbell v. State, 525 S.W.2d 4. If a verbal description of the body and scene is admissible, then a photograph depicting the same is admissible. Luck v. State, 58......
  • Duffy v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 7 Junio 1978
    ...for review. Wilder v. State, 558 S.W.2d 883 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Hunter v. State, 530 S.W.2d 573 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Campbell v. State, 525 S.W.2d 4 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Cox v. State, 523 S.W.2d 695 Appellant next contends that it was error for the prosecutor to refer to the instant trial as an ......
  • Webb v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 15 Febrero 1989
    ...Archer, supra; Beecham v. State, 580 S.W.2d 588 (Tex.Cr.App.1979); Cooper v. State, 578 S.W.2d 401 (Tex.Cr.App.1979); Campbell v. State, 525 S.W.2d 4 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Crawford v. State, 165 Tex.Cr.R. 147, 305 S.W.2d 362 (1957); Perry v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 8, 266 S.W.2d 171 (1954); Wilso......
  • Livingston v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 6 Octubre 1976
    ...and not in compliance with Article 49.09, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. See Rodriquez v. State, 530 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Campbell v. State, 525 S.W.2d 4 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Abercrombie v. State, 528 S.W.2d 578 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Weeks v. State, 521 S.W.2d 858 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Jackson v. Sta......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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