Dukes v. State, 27461
| Decision Date | 16 March 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 27461,27461 |
| Citation | 161 Tex.Crim. 423,277 S.W.2d 710 |
| Parties | Rayford DUKES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
A. L. Wardlaw, Fort Worth, C. O. McMillan, Stephenville, for appellant.
Leon Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DICE, Commissioner.
The conviction is for robbery by the use of firearms; the punishment, five years in the penitentiary.
The State's evidence shows that the injured party, Henry Parker, was robbed while engaged in a poker game with three other companions, Seaborn Benningfield, Cecil Abraham, and George Heath, as the four were gambling in an old house on the Heath Place situated in the Huckabay community in Erath County.
According to the State's testimony, the four were seated at a table when two men appeared at the door around 1:30 o'clock in the morning with handkerchiefs tied over their mouth and chin and each holding a pistol which they were pointing towards the group. The man who was described as the older and taller of the two stated, 'This is a holdup.' Whereupon the four poker players were forced at the point of guns to stand up and face and wall. After the four were in this position the younger and smaller of the two men proceeded to search the pockets of the injured party and take from him his billfold which contained $500 in currency, and at the same time searched Benningfield and Abraham and took their billfolds and some personal effects.
After the robbery the two men left in a car and were pursued by Parker and Benningfield who, during the pursuit, came upon a Cadillac automobile which had run into a tree at a sharp curve on the highway. Upon seeing no one in the Cadillac car, Parker went to a house to call the officers who thereafter arrived at the scene of the wreck. After the arrival of the officers, a truck drove up and stopped, and a man riding with the driver got out. The evidence shows that such person was C. W. Dukes, a brother of the appellant, who the witnesses, Parker and Benningfield testified was the older and taller of the two men who had robbed them.
The witnesses, Parker and Benning-field, both testified that several days after the robbery they accompanied certain officers to Center, Texas, and identified the appellant as one of the men who had robbed them. While testifying as witnesses for the State, they positively identified appellant as the younger and smaller of the two men who had robbed them on the night in question.
Appellant did not testify in his own behalf but interposed the defense of alibi, offering the testimony of witnesses who testified that they saw appellant in Center, Texas, at various times during the day and night before the robbery. One of the witnesses testified that she saw appellant as late as 10:25 o'clock on the night before the robbery.
Bills of Exception Nos. 1 and 2 present appellant's exception to the action of the trial court in sustaining the State's objection to certain questions propounded on cross-examination of the State's witness Parker as to whether the witness had visited in Tarrant County on several occasions, and whether he had ever seen anyone else play poker at the George Heath residence besides the four men who were playing there on the night of the robbery. Such inquiries were as to immaterial matters and the court did not err in sustaining the State's objection thereto.
By Informal Bills Nos. 3, 4 and 5 appellant further complains of the action of the court in sustaining the State's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Carrillo v. State
...Jordan v. State, 500 S.W.2d 638 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Smith v. State, 496 S.W.2d 564 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Dukes v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 423, 277 S.W.2d 710 (1955). Appellant contends that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury that Chapa and Taylor were accomplice witnesses as a ......
-
Bustillos v. State
...S.W.2d 328; Dempsey v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 602, 266 S.W.2d 875; Mauldin v. State, 165 Tex.Cr.R. 405, 308 S.W.2d 36; Dukes v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 423, 277 S.W.2d 710; Wardrope v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 305, 340 S.W.2d 498; Ridler v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 375 S.W.2d And the Legislature never so......
-
Johnson v. State
... ... State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 275, 124 S.W.2d 991 (1938); Edwards v. State, 144 Tex.Cr.R. 485, 164 S.W.2d 706 (1942); Dukes v. State, ... Page 310 ... 161 Tex.Cr.R. 423, 277 S.W.2d 710 (1955); White v. State, 385 S.W.2d 397 (Tex.Cr.App.1964); Minor v. State, 476 ... ...
-
Mitchell v. State, 49216
...adequately protected appellant's rights. Jordan v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 500 S.W.2d 638; Bryant v. State, 496 S.W.2d 565; Dukes v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 423, 277 S.W.2d 710. Appellant's second and third grounds of error are overruled. In his fourth ground, appellant contends that the court err......