Grant v. State, 42592
Decision Date | 18 February 1970 |
Docket Number | No. 42592,42592 |
Citation | 450 S.W.2d 642 |
Parties | Douglas Lee GRANT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Howard B. Law, Donald R. Scoggins, Dallas (on appeal only), for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., John B. Tolle, Camille Elliott, James P. Finstrom, Jim Ramsey and Russell Ormesher, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is assault with intent to murder with malice; the punishment, 25 years.
The jury rejected appellant's plea of self defense and his application for probation.
The sole ground of error set forth in appellant's brief is:
'THIS APPELLANT WAS DENIED A FAIR TRIAL BY THE TRIAL COURT'S ALLOWING THE STATE'S ATTORNEY TO DISPLAY AN INADMISSIBLE KNIFE TO THE JURY AND BY PERMITTING TESTIMONY WHICH WAS OF NO PROBATIVE VALUE AND SERVED ONLY TO INFLAME THE MINDS OF THE JURORS AND PREJUDICE THIS APPELLANT WITHOUT REGARD TO THE FACTS.'
The knife used in the stabbing was not recovered. The knife referred to in the ground of error was marked as an exhibit and was shown to state's witnesses Glen Littles and the complaining witness from whom testimony was elicited that if appeared to be the kind of knife they saw appellant use in stabbing the complaining witness.
There was no objection in regard to the exhibiting of the knife to these witnesses or to their testimony.
The knife exhibited to the witnesses was not admitted in evidence. It is not a part of the record on appeal. It is described in the record only as 'a banana knife' and as 'a...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Waters v. State
...failed to request a limiting instruction, did not move for a mistrial and subsequently withdrew his objection. Grant v. State, 450 S.W.2d 642, 643 (Tex.Crim.App.1970). The point of error is The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. * Both appellant and the State rely on the reasoning of ......
-
Ortega v. State
...were present in the same room when appellant attacked her sexually and forced her to commit acts of sodomy with him. As in Grant v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 450 S.W.2d 642, we find no reversible error. A portion of the time the knife was shown to the witness the jury was out of the courtroom. In......
-
Brito v. State
...presented, that the State was guilty of misconduct or acted in bad faith. See Ortega v. State (No. 43,084). Cf. Grant v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 450 S.W.2d 642. Next, appellant complains the trial court erred in failing to grant a mistrial upon request 'when on two occasions the prosecutor impr......