Cox v. State
| Decision Date | 02 March 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 31525,31525 |
| Citation | 169 Tex.Crim. 332,333 S.W.2d 849 |
| Parties | Fred COX, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Burt Barr, Dallas, Jack Morgan, Kaufman, Jess Rickman, Terrell, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DICE, Commissioner.
The conviction is for the unlawful sale of whiskey in a dry area with a prior conviction for an offense of like character alleged for the purpose of enhancement; the punishment, a find of $1,000.
Joe R. House, an undercover agent for the Texas Liquor Control Board, testified that on the day in question while he was traveling on a highway in Kaufman County he met the appellant driving a pickup truck; that they both stopped and engaged in a conversation in which he told appellant he wanted a pint of whiskey and appellant said 'Okay' 'Go on out the road, drive slow and wait on me and I'll catch up with you;' that they then parted company and he drove down the road where he parked and waited until appellant returned some thirty minutes later; that he then proceeded to follow the appellant to a farm house where he was again told to wait; that the appellant left and returned in approximately fifteen minutes with a pint bottle of J. W. Dant Whiskey which he handed to the witness who in return handed the appellant $5. The pint bottle of whiskey, after being properly identified, was introduced in evidence.
Proof was made by the State that appellant had been previously convicted of the offense of unlawfully transporting intoxicating liquor in a dry area as alleged in the information.
As a witness in his own behalf, appellant denied having any conversation or transaction with agent House relative to the sale of the whiskey; denied selling him any whiskey and stated that the first time he saw agent House on the day in question was when he came to the farm house and placed appellant under arrest. Appellant called his father as a witness, who testified that he was with appellant on the day in question and corroborated the appellant in his denial of the sale of whiskey to agent House.
Appellant insists that the court erred in overruling his motion to quash that portion of the information alleging the prior conviction on the ground that the offenses of unlawfully selling intoxicating liquor in a dry area and unlawfully transporting intoxicating liquor in a dry area are not offenses of like character. In Lenore v. State, 137 Tex.Cr.R. 417, 129 S.W.2d 657, the offenses of transporting liquor in a dry area and possessing intoxicating...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Clark v. State
...concerning this issue. McKinney v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 372 S.W.2d 699; Beck v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 534, 360 S.W.2d 410; Cox v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 332, 333 S.W.2d 849. We further find that the trial judge properly allowed the State to show that appellant had, on a prior occasion, sold her......
-
McKelva v. State
...371, 277 S.W.2d 712; Vela v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 373 S.W.2d 505; McKinney v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 372 S.W.2d 699; Cox v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 332, 333 S.W.2d 849; Price v. State, 55 Tex.Cr.R. 157, 115 S.W. In the case at bar the State's evidence reflects that Thomas Wadkins, an undercover ag......
-
Reeves v. State, 45433
...instruction on entrapment. See, Vera v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 473 S.W.2d 22; Ochoa v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 444 S.W.2d 763; Cox v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 332, 333 S.W.2d 849. See also, 8 Willson, Tex.Crim. Forms 7th Ed., Sec. 3579, p. 581; McClung, Jury Charges for Texas Criminal Practice, pp. Ap......
-
Fleming v. State
...no charge on the issue of entrapment. Vela v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 373 S.W.2d 505, and cases cited therein at 507; Cox v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 332, 333 S.W.2d 849; Ridinger v. State, supra. Neither is entrapment shown in such circumstances as a matter of law. Dumont v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 39......