Ellis v. State, s. 47908

Decision Date12 December 1973
Docket Number47909,Nos. 47908,s. 47908
Citation502 S.W.2d 146
PartiesRobert G. ELLIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Brock Huffman, San Antonio, for appellant.

Ted Butler, Dist. Atty., Bill Harris and David K. Chapman, Asst. Dist. Attys., San Antonio, Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., and Buddy Stevens, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

OPINION

GREEN, Commissioner.

Appellant was convicted in our Cause No. 47,908 (trial court No. 72--2259) of possession of a narcotic drug, to-wit, marihuana, and in our No. 47,909 (trial court No. 72--2260) of possession of narcotic paraphernalia. He waived a jury and in a joint trial of the two cases he was found guilty and was assessed a punishment of five years in each case, sentences to run concurrently.

In his brief applicable alike to both cases, appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to support the convictions.

Appellant, after being properly admonished as provided by Article 26.13, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., plead guilty to each charge alleged in the two indictments. Thereupon the State placed in evidence written stipulations signed by the State, defense counsel, and appellant and verified by appellant. These stipulations included judicial confessions to all of the allegations charged in each of the indictments, which were sufficient to sustain the convictions. McNeese v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 468 S.W.2d 801; Johnson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 954. They also included waivers of confrontation and cross-examination of witnesses. Under the stipulations, the State introduced, without objections, written reports of police officers amply sufficient to prove possession by appellant of over one pound of marihuana, and of the narcotic paraphernalia. Appellant's ground of error is overruled.

We are next met with the problem of whether, under the facts shown by the record, the doctrines of double jeopardy and carving are applicable. The State's evidence, including the written reports of the arresting officers, disclosed that the marihuana and the narcotic paraphernalia were seized by the officers in the same search of appellant's apartment under a single search warrant. The indictments allege the same date for the commission of both offenses, both violations of the same statute, Article 725b, Vernon's Ann.P.C. The two convictions were had in the same court, on the same day, before the same judge, and were based on the same evidence.

Although the pleas of double jeopardy, and carving, were not raised in the trial court or in this court, they involve a violation of both the State and Federal Constitutions, and under the above stated facts require our review 'in the interest of justice.' See Art. 40.09, § 13, V.A.C.C.P.; Duckett v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 454 S.W.2d 755; Price v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 742. Cf. Shaffer v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 477 S.W.2d 873.

From the above, we have concluded that the two charges constitute but one offense, and...

To continue reading

Request your trial
17 cases
  • Rubino v. Lynaugh
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 26 Abril 1989
    ...632 S.W.2d 594 (Tex.Cr.App.1982) (On original submission), which also cited Ex parte Harris and Orosco as authority; Ellis v. State, 502 S.W.2d 146 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Ex parte Evans, 530 S.W.2d 589 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Ex parte Hilliard, 538 S.W.2d 135 (Tex.Cr.App.1976); Ex parte Jewel, 535 S......
  • Casey v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 23 Marzo 1992
    ...judge, on the same date, and arose out of the same transaction); Jones v. State, 502 S.W.2d 164 (Tex.Crim.App.1973); Ellis v. State, 502 S.W.2d 146, 147 (Tex.Crim.App.1973) (when the two offenses are in the same court, on the same day, before the same judge, and are based on the same eviden......
  • State v. Gordon
    • United States
    • Missouri Court of Appeals
    • 23 Marzo 1976
    ...271 A.2d 17 (1970), Jones v. State, 482 S.W.2d 194 (Tex.Cr.App.1972), Wells v. State, 517 S.W.2d 755 (Tenn.1974), and Ellis v. State, 502 S.W.2d 146 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). The State, on the other hand, contends that the holdings in Braden and Parmagini are of doubtful validity in view of the ru......
  • Williams v. State, 49498
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 30 Abril 1975
    ...review of record without statement of facts; Lee v. State, 505 S.W.2d 816 (Tex.Cr.App.1974) double jeopardy; Ellis v. State, 502 S.W.2d 146 (Tex.Cr.App.1973) carving; Long v. State, 502 S.W.2d 139 (Tex.Cr.App.1973) ineffective assistance of counsel; Hartman v. State, 496 S.W.2d 582 (Tex.Cr.......
  • 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