Gooden v. State
| Decision Date | 13 March 1968 |
| Docket Number | No. 41121,41121 |
| Citation | 425 S.W.2d 645 |
| Parties | Ralph Dugan GOODEN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Sam R. Wilson, Houston, for appellant.
Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James C. Brough, Asst. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is Felony Theft; the punishment, ten (10) years confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections. The appellant waived trial by jury and entered his plea of guilty before the court. The evidence was stipulated in accordance with Article 1.15, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P.
On appeal appellant complains that the lack of an examining trial deprived him of the effective assistance of counsel and vitiates his conviction. This ground of error is raised for the first time in the appellate brief filed in the trial court. There is nothing in the record to indicate that at any time appellant requested an examining trial and was denied the same.
The return of an indictment terminates the right to an examining trial. Article 16.01, V.A.C.C.P. See Bryant v. State, Tex., 423 S.W.2d 320.
Further, Trussell v. State, Tex., 414 S.W.2d 466; Ash v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 703; Murphy v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 424 S.W.2d 231 (1968) are authority for the rule that the failure to grant an examining trial prior to the return of the indictment does not affect the validity of the indictment.
Appellant's ground of error is overruled.
The judgment is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris v. State
...The return of the indictment on March 2, 1967, terminated any right to an examining trial. Article 16.01, V.A.C.C.P.; Gooden v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 425 S.W.2d 645; Ash v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 703; Murphy v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 424 S.W.2d 231; Bryant v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 423 S.W.......
-
Menefee v. State
...McCullough v. State, 461 S.W.2d 404 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Wilhelm v. State, 426 S.W.2d 850 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Gooden v. State, 425 S.W.2d 645 (Tex.Cr.App.1968). This rule has been adhered to even in situations where an examining trial has been requested but an indictment has been returned befo......
-
Tarpley v. State
...and there is no other evidence which shows that he either requested or was refused counsel or an examining trial. In Gooden v. State, 425 S.W.2d 645 (Tex.Cr.App.1968), this Court held that the failure to grant the defendant an examining trial was not an erroneous deprivation of effective as......
-
Wilhelm v. State
...same. Further, the right to an examining trial is terminated upon the return of an indicmtent. Article 16.01, V.A.C.C.P.; Gooden v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 425 S.W.2d 645 (delivered March 13, 1968); Bryant v. State, Tex.Crim.App., 423 S.W.2d 320. Appellant's eighth, ninth, and tenth grounds of ......