Fobbs v. State
| Decision Date | 23 June 1971 |
| Docket Number | No. 43901,43901 |
| Citation | 468 S.W.2d 392 |
| Parties | Ulysses Charles FOBBS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Stiles & Cribbs, Beaumont, for appellant.
Tom Hanna, Dist. Atty., and Lawrence J. Gist, Asst. Dist. Atty., Beaumont, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This appeal is from a conviction for the offense of indecent exposure to a child; the punishment, enhanced under Article 63, Vernon's Ann.P.C., life.
Appellant alleges three grounds of error, the first being that the trial court erred by admitting into evidence state's exhibits without the proper predicate having been made. The complained of exhibits were four photographs identified by the complaining witness. After he identified the pictures the following is revealed in the record:
'Q. (By State's Attorney) And everything out there that day did it look like it does in these pictures I have shown you?
This was sufficient to show that the photographs fairly and accurately depicted the scene on the date of the offense and were properly admitted into evidence. Wright v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 440 S.W.2d 646; Rodriguez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 399 S.W.2d 818; McFarlane v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 658, 266 S.W.2d 133; 23 Tex.Jur.2d 478, Evidence, Sec. 329.
Ground of error number one is overruled.
Next, appellant contends that the court abused its discretion in holding the complaining witness to be competent to testify. The witness was first interrograted by the court on voir dire out of the jury's presence. He testified that he was eleven years old, knew when his birthdate was, lives with his parents and was in the sixth grade and made good grades in school. He stated that he knew the difference between telling the truth and a lie and he knew what a lie is. He testified that he remembered what happened at the scene and knew that if he did not tell the truth he would be punished; that he attended church and that he learned that he is to tell the truth and the Lord would tell him to tell the truth. It is apparent that he intelligently understood the nature and obligation of his oath. 61 Tex.Jur.2d 606, Witnesses, Sec. 63.
We conclude that the witness was competent to testify and no abuse of discretion is shown. See Article 38.06, Sec. 2, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P.
Ground of error number two is overruled.
Finally, appellant contends that 'the judgment of conviction is erroneous as a matter of law and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Martin v. State
...and clothing. All four were properly authenticated as being fair and accurate representations of the scenes which they depict. Fobbs v. State, 468 S.W.2d 392. A determination as to the admissibility of photographic evidence is made upon the same basis as is a decision on the admissibility o......
-
West v. State, 48574
...that the punishment is cruel and unusual is overruled. Article 63, V.A.P.C., is applicable to a case of this type. Fobbs v. State, 468 S.W.2d 392 (Tex.Cr.App.1971). The constitutionality of the statute has been upheld by this Court against similar attacks. See Shaver v. State, 496 S.W.2d 60......
-
Stone v. State
...shows that these photographs fairly and accurately depict the scene on the date of the offense, they are admissible. 1 Fobbs v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 468 S.W.2d 392; Haas v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 498 S.W.2d 206; Goss v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 549 S.W.2d Insofar as the record reflects, the acts whi......
-
Gamblin v. State, 44403
...See, Martin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 265 (1--26--72); Lanham v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 474 S.W.2d 197 (11--17--71); Fobbs v. State, Tex.Cr.App.,468 S.W.2d 392. The photographs in question in the instant case are in black and white. No blood, or dark splotches appearing to be blood are......