Foster v. State, 23129.

Decision Date16 May 1945
Docket NumberNo. 23129.,23129.
Citation187 S.W.2d 575
PartiesFOSTER v. STATE.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Grayson County; W. C. Dowdy, Judge.

Billie Foster was convicted of rape, and he appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

A. F. Nossaman, of Sherman, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is rape. The punishment assessed is confinement in the state penitentiary for a term of five years.

The record is before us without a statement of the facts proven on the trial.

There is but one bill of exception in the record which was prepared by the trial court because the bill on the subject prepared by appellant was found to be incorrect by the State's Attorney and the court. Whereupon, the court suggested to counsel for appellant that certain corrections be made, but appellant's counsel refused to agree to the corrections as suggested by the court. Thereupon the court endorsed thereon his refusal to approve the bill and returned it to appellant's counsel. The bill, as prepared and filed by the court, shows that at the conclusion of the State's evidence in chief and before appellant had offered any evidence in his behalf, he filed a written motion requesting that he be granted permission to personally make a statement to the jury of the nature of his defense and the facts which he expected to prove in support thereof. The trial court declined to permit appellant to do so, but informed counsel that he might make the opening statement, which his counsel declined to do. The trial court based his action in the matter complained of on Section 5 of Article 642, C.C.P., which provides as follows: "The nature of the defenses relied upon and the facts expected to be proved in their support shall be stated by defendant's counsel."

Under the provisions of the article quoted, appellant had the right by and through his counsel to make such statement, and this right the court accorded him, but he declined to avail himself thereof and insisted on doing so in person. No reason is assigned why his counsel, who was conducting his defense, could not have made the statement as well as appellant might have done. No injury is shown to have resulted to appellant from the court's ruling, and none will be presumed under the circumstances here disclosed. In support of the opinion here expressed, we refer to the following authorities: McBride v. State, 110 Tex.Cr.R. 308, 7 S.W.2d 1091...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 cases
  • State v. Young
    • United States
    • Utah Supreme Court
    • 17 Marzo 1993
    ...State v. Velanti, 331 S.W.2d 542, 546 (Mo.1960); Rehfeld v. State, 102 Ohio St. 431, 131 N.E. 712, 714 (1921); Foster v. State, 148 Tex.Crim. 372, 187 S.W.2d 575, 576 (Tex.1945); State v. Saari, 152 Vt. 510, 568 A.2d 344, 350-51 (1989).166 21A Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 767 (1981).167 Laffert......
  • Moore v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 24 Noviembre 1993
    ...but not to insist on personally making it to the jury in lieu of counsel, unless counsel could not make it. Foster v. State, 148 Tex.Cr.R. 372, 187 S.W.2d 575, at 576 (1945). Accord: Cameron v. State, 153 Tex.Cr.R. 29, 217 S.W.2d 23, at 24 (1949); Caraway v. State, 417 S.W.2d 159, at 161 (T......
  • Johnson v. State, 30162
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 17 Diciembre 1958
    ...judge who insisted that the procedure outlined in the statute be followed. McBride is cited with approval as late as Foster v. State, 148 Tex.Cr.R. 372, 187 S.W.2d 575, and we are inclined to follow it, especially in view of the nature of the case and the trial court's qualification to the ......
  • Ward v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 10 Enero 1968
    ...See also Peterson v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 105, 235 S.W.2d 138; Christoph v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 453, 314 S.W.2d 840; Foster v. State, 148 Tex.Cr.R. 372, 187 S.W.2d 575. See also Thompson v. State (Fla.App.) 194 So.2d 649. As his ground of error No. 6, appellant contends that the trial cour......
  • 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