Farmer v. State
| Decision Date | 02 February 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 44559,44559 |
| Citation | 475 S.W.2d 753 |
| Parties | Taylor E. FARMER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Bobby H. Caldwell, Houston, for appellant.
Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James C. Brough and William W. Burge, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This is an appeal from an order revoking probation.
The record reflects that on October 3, 1968, appellant plead guilty before the court to the offense of felony theft. The punishment was assessed at four years, but the imposition of the sentence was suspended and appellant was granted probation.
One of the terms and conditions of the probation was that the appellant violate no laws of this State or any other state.
On September 11, 1969, the State filed a motion to revoke probation alleging that the appellant had violated his probationary conditions in that he had violated the laws of this State by committing the offense of assault to murder on or about August 28, 1969.
Appellant raises five complaints, all of which relate to supposed abuse of discretion by the trial court. The first two complaints are general in nature, the first stating that the trial court 'committed reversible error in the revoking of the probation of the appellant.' Second, '* * * because such action is not supported by the law and evidence.' Number three, '* * * because of a subsequent trial of said cause in which the appellant was found not guilty of the offense of assault to murder on the complaining James Bell Bailey and also that subsequent to said trial, the alleged offense of assault to murder on George H. Lane was dismissed on the motion of the State.' Fourth, '* * * because of the conflicting finding between the judge of said court and the revocation hearing and the finding of the jury in the assault to murder case, that a reasonable doubt should exist as to whether or not the defendant violated the conditions of his probation * * *.' Fifth, 'that the trial court erred in having a hearing on the revocation of probation prior to the trial of the alleged violation.'
There is only one question before the reviewing court on a revocation of probation and that is: Was there an abuse of discretion by the trial judge in revoking the probation? E.g. Armstrong v. State, 472 S.W.2d 150 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971); Branch v. State, 465 S.W.2d 160 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971); Patton v. State, 450 S.W.2d 856 (Tex.Cr.App. 1970); Pitts v. State, 442 S.W.2d 389 (Tex.Cr.App. 1969). In this case, we find there was not.
In a hearing of this type, the trial judge is the trier of the facts and as such can believe those witnesses it chooses to believe and disbelieve those witnesses it chooses not to believe just as a jury can when it is the trier of the facts. e.g. Rhodes v. State, 441 S.W.2d 197 (Tex.Cr.App. 1969); Bryant v. State, 446 S.W.2d 869 (Tex.Cr.App. 1969); Stevens v. State, 426 S.W.2d 222 (Tex.Cr.App. 1968); Walker v. State, 395 S.W.2d 645 (Tex.Cr.App. 1965); Adair v. State, 388 S.W.2d 943 (Tex.Cr.App. 1965).
An adult probation officer of Harris County identified the appellant as a person who had been reporting to him since August of 1969 in regard to the conviction on October 3, 1968.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kelly v. State
...Hall v. State, supra; Maddox v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 466 S.W.2d 755; Hulsey v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 447 S.W.2d 165; and Farmer v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 753. The only question before this Court is whether the trial court abused its discretion in revoking probation. Bennett v. State, T......
-
Martinez v. State, 46802
...S.W.2d 490, 493 (Tex.Cr.App.1970), and cases there cited. Armstrong v. State, 472 S.W.2d 150, 151 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Farmer v. State, 475 S.W.2d 753 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Vance v. State, 485 S.W.2d 580, 582 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Irby v. State, 475 S.W.2d 918 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Mason v. State, 473......
-
Bradshaw v. State
...694; Beck v. State, 492 S.W.2d 536 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Hancock v. State, 491 S.W.2d 139 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). In fact, in Farmer v. State, 475 S.W.2d 753 (Tex.Cr.App.1972), this court speaking through Judge Roberts 'In the last year this Court has written, in cases too numerous to mention, that......
-
Malveaux v. State, 45605
...carrying a pistol. Carr v. State, 476 S.W.2d 329 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Bennett v. State, 476 S.W.2d 281 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Farmer v. State, 475 S.W.2d 753 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Hall v. State, 452 S.W.2d 490 (Tex.Cr.App.1970). We have examined each of appellant's other contentions, including the a......