Galan v. State
Decision Date | 06 March 1957 |
Docket Number | No. 28858,28858 |
Citation | 301 S.W.2d 141,164 Tex.Crim. 521 |
Parties | Joaquin GALAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
B. L. Jeffery, Carrizo Spring, G. C. Jackson, Crystal City, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, 3 days in jail and a fine of $50.
Highway Patrolman Pirtle testified that on the occasion in question his attention was directed to an automobile which was coming toward him and which was being driven first off the pavement on its right side and then across the center stripe into the left hand traffic lane, that he took to the ditch to avoid being hit, turned around, and gave pursuit. He stated that after considerable effort he was able to bring the vehicle to a halt, instructed the appellant, who was the driver, to get out and exhibit his driver's license. He stated that the appellant staggered, 'his hands seemed all thumbs,' his eyes were dilated, he conducted himself in an entirely different manner than he did on other occasions when he had seen the appellant sober, and concluded that he was intoxicated and placed him in jail.
The appellant did not testify or offer any evidence in his own behalf.
We find the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and shall discuss the bills of exception in the order advanced in the appellant's brief.
Bill of exception No. 5 reflects that near the conclusion of Officer Pirtle's testimony the appellant moved for a mistrial
Appellant would have this Court apply this motion for a mistrial as an objection to a certain portion of the officer's testimony, which he now says was in violation of the rule announced by this Court in Apodaca v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 593, 146 S.W.2d 381. There was no objection made at the time the testimony was elicited, and no reason has been assigned for his failure to object. A motion requesting the jury not to consider all of the officer's testimony covering a certain period of time, some of which was admissible without question, will not take the place of an objection to that portion which he now contends was inadmissible. Mitchell v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 128, 239 S.W.2d 384, and Cornelius v. State, 157 Tex.Cr.R. 129, 246 S.W.2d 886.
Bill of exception No. 6 complains of the failure of the court to define 'drunk' or 'intoxicated' in his charge. Such terms need not be defined. Davis v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 602, 155 S.W.2d 801; Driggs v. State, 151 Tex.Cr.R. 391, 208 S.W.2d 557; and Pierce v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 504, 265 S.W.2d 601.
Bill of exception No. 4 complains of the failure of the court to charge the jury that the complaint and information were no evidence of guilt. Recently, in Magness v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 573, 244 S.W.2d 810, in writing on the same...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Blevins v. State
...of guilt, the failure to so instruct the jury is not error. Jaffrion v. State, 501 S.W.2d 322 (Tex.Crim.App.1973); Galan v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 521, 301 S.W.2d 141 (1957); Ponder v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 585, 265 S.W.2d 836 (1954); Pounds v. State, 142 Tex.Cr.R. 52, 150 S.W.2d 798 (1941). S......
-
Smith v. State
...note 420; 1 Branch's Ann.P.C., 2nd. ed., Sec. 397, p. 419; Gaines v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 271, 320 S.W.2d 157; Galan v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 521, 301 S.W.2d 141. In Small v. State, 132 Tex.Cr.R. 279, 104 S.W.2d 52, it was held that instruction on defendant's failure to testify being substan......
-
State v. Keffer
...State v. Sauerbry, 233 Iowa 1076, 10 N.W.2d 544, 546 (1943); State v. D'Orio, 136 N.J.L. 204, 51 A.2d 97 (1947); Galan v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 521, 301 S.W.2d 141, 143 (1957); Gaertner v. State, 35 Wis.2d 159, 150 N.W.2d 370, 378 (1967). The tests suggested in those cases are met The record......
-
Reddie v. State
...The judgment is reversed and the case remanded for the purpose of entry of a judgment of acquittal. 1 In Galan v. State, 164 Tex.Crim. 521, 301 S.W.2d 141, 142 (1957) the defendant was indicted for operating a motor vehicle while intoxicated, and the jury was charged they might convict upon......