Easley v. State, No. 42493
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
| Writing for the Court | ONION |
| Citation | 448 S.W.2d 490 |
| Parties | Aubrey Joe EASLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 42493 |
| Decision Date | 07 January 1970 |
Page 490
v.
The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Donald D. Koons, Dallas (on appeal only), for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., and William Hill, Jim Barklow, John B. Tolle, Camille Elliott and James P. Finstrom, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
ONION, Judge.
The offense is rape; the punishment, 99 years.
Appellant was clearly identified by the complaining witness as the man who grabbed her on a Dallas County public street on September 15, 1967, forced her into a nearby garage and raped her. The State also offered appellant's written confession.
Court appointed counsel on appeal poses the following two questions:
'1. Whether Appellant knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his constitutional rights so as to make a written confession admissible in evidence against him.
'2. Whether the record shows sufficient compliance with Article 15.17 Texas Code of Criminal Procedure dealing with the taking of a Defendant before a magistrate, before Appellant was questioned about any alleged rape; the record reflecting that he was arrested for offenses other than those for which he was tried.'
Appellant commences his argument by contending the dissent in Charles v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 424 S.W.2d 909, cert. den. 392 U.S. 940, 88 S.Ct. 2319, 20 L.Ed.2d 1401, properly interpreted the requirements of Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 86 S.Ct. 1602, 16 L.Ed.2d 694, as to the requisite warnings and affirmative waiver of rights. Conceding that even if the majority's position in Charles was correct that the warnings under Articles 15.17 and 38.22, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., 1965, then in effect, were as 'fully effective' as Miranda without regard to waiver, appellant calls attention to the 1967 amendments to Articles 15.17 and 38.22, supra, particularly with reference to the requirements of Article 38.22, supra, as to waiver.
Article 38.22, Sec. 1(c)(3) provides in part:
'The defendant must knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waive these rights prior to and during the making of the statement.'
Appellant contends that whatever interpretation may be given to the Miranda requirement as to waiver the above quoted portion of Article 38.22, supra, must now be considered with regard to the admissibility of any confession.
He claims the record before us does not show that he affirmatively waived his rights and the court erred in admitting, over objection, his confession.
The record shows appellant was arrested on October 14, 1967. While not as clear as...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Nash v. State, No. 44421
...From a totality of the circumstances, we do not agree. McCandless v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 425 S.W.2d 636; Easley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 448 S.W.2d 490; Thomas v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 458 S.W.2d For all the reasons discussed above and in light of the record before us, we reject appellant's cla......
-
Work v. State, NO. 03-19-00961-CR
...v. State, 544 S.W.2d 129, 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976); Schultz v. State, 510 S.W.2d 940, 943 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970); Hughes v. State, 409 S.W.2d 416, 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966); Creswell v. State, 387 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex. Crim. Ap......
-
Work v. State, NO. 03-18-00815-CR
...v. State, 544 S.W.2d 129, 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976); Schultz v. State, 510 S.W.2d 940, 943 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970); Hughes v. State, 409 S.W.2d 416, 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966); Creswell v. State, 387 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex. Crim. Ap......
-
Williams v. State, 68879
...with the statute does not automatically invalidate a confession. Shadrick v. State, 491 S.W.2d 681 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490 (Tex.Cr.App.1970). Absent a showing of a causal connection between an accused's confession and the failure to take the accused promptly befor......
-
Nash v. State, No. 44421
...From a totality of the circumstances, we do not agree. McCandless v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 425 S.W.2d 636; Easley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 448 S.W.2d 490; Thomas v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 458 S.W.2d For all the reasons discussed above and in light of the record before us, we reject appellant's cla......
-
Work v. State, NO. 03-19-00961-CR
...v. State, 544 S.W.2d 129, 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976); Schultz v. State, 510 S.W.2d 940, 943 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970); Hughes v. State, 409 S.W.2d 416, 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966); Creswell v. State, 387 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex. Crim. Ap......
-
Work v. State, NO. 03-18-00815-CR
...v. State, 544 S.W.2d 129, 135 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976); Schultz v. State, 510 S.W.2d 940, 943 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490, 492 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970); Hughes v. State, 409 S.W.2d 416, 417 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966); Creswell v. State, 387 S.W.2d 887, 890 (Tex. Crim. Ap......
-
Williams v. State, 68879
...with the statute does not automatically invalidate a confession. Shadrick v. State, 491 S.W.2d 681 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Easley v. State, 448 S.W.2d 490 (Tex.Cr.App.1970). Absent a showing of a causal connection between an accused's confession and the failure to take the accused promptly befor......