Cook v. State, 39948

Decision Date31 December 1966
Docket NumberNo. 39948,39948
Citation409 S.W.2d 857
PartiesAcie COOK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Richard E. Harrison, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Curtis D. Glover and Kerry P. FitzGerald, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

BELCHER, Commissioner.

Upon a jury trial on March 9, 1966, the appellant was found guilty of the possession of marihuana. The punishment was assessed by the jury at fifteen years.

The appellant assigns as error the failure of the trial court to sustain his objection and motion to declare a mistrial when the state introduced in evidence a .38 caliber pistol, and five live shells on the ground that the appellant was on trial for the possession of marihuana and not for the possession of firearms.

The evidence of the state reveals that when Officer Riggs saw a marihuana cigarette in appellant's hand in a night club, he took possession of the cigarette, and on searching the appellant outside of the club he found a .38 caliber pistol containing three live shells and two other live shells in his pocket.

While testifying in his own behalf, the appellant on direct examination stated that the pistol introduced in evidence by the state was his gun and he had it with him when he was arrested by Officer Riggs.

It is a general rule that an accused cannot complain of the admission of testimony when he later testified on direct examination to substantially the same facts. Phillips v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 206, 312 S.W.2d 644; Hudson v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 565, 361 S.W.2d 388; McCain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 363 S.W.2d 257; Jenkins v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 367 S.W.2d 343; Long v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 375 S.W.2d 913.

No error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the Court.

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 cases
  • Thomas v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 10, 1976
    ...character of the defendant. However, this case appears to contradict Robbins v. State, 481 S.W.2d 419 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Cook v. State, 409 S.W.2d 857 (Tex.Cr.App.1966), and Meadowes v. State, 368 S.W.2d 203 (Tex.Cr.App.1963), all of which held that objection to improper evidence of an extr......
  • Morgan v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 6, 1985
    ...admissibility where the defendant testifies to the same facts as those objected to, there is no error presented. Cook v. State, 409 S.W.2d 857 (Tex.Cr.App.1966); Sherlock v. State, 632 S.W.2d 604 (Tex.Cr.App.1982). See also Garza v. State, 442 S.W.2d 693 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); Ochoa v. State, 5......
  • Wallace v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • February 17, 1971
    ...of testimony which he later voluntarily offers himself and expounds upon. Baity v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 305, 309; Cook v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 409 S.W.2d 857. See also Brown v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 457 S.W.2d We need not rest, however, our decision upon such claim of the prosecution......
  • Baity v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 22, 1970
    ...cannot complain of the improper admission of testimony which he later voluntarily offers himself and expounds upon. Cook v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 409 S.W.2d 857. Appellant, who admitted a number of prior convictions for felony theft and burglary, testified he had gone to the cafeteria to repa......
  • 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