Hendricks v. State, 47826
| Decision Date | 24 April 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. 47826,47826 |
| Parties | Quinby C. HENDRICKS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Joe J. Newman, Houston, for appellant.
Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., Phyllis Bell, Charles Cate, Asst. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This is an appeal from a conviction for murder without malice. The jury assessed the punishment at five years.
Preston Hicks, Sally Prudence Hicks and the appellant were jointly indicted for the murder of Thomas Wootton.
The main contention of the appellant is that the court erred in refusing to charge that Preston Hicks, a co-indictee who testified for the State, was an accomplice witness as a matter of law. We agree and reverse.
Prior to the shooting of the deceased by Preston Hicks, there had been some arguments between Hicks and the appellant who were on one side, and a group including Tommy Wootton and Jim Barham. Hicks testified that he and the appellant had been threatened. He also related that appellant said the two were going to the A.B.J. Lounge to get their 'business straight.' This meant whatever action or force that was necessary, which included killing, to get it straight. He testified that the appellant was armed with a 'three-eighty automatic' and he (Hicks) was armed with a shotgun when they went to the lounge. When they arrived at the lounge, Hicks asked the group present about the threat. According to Hicks, Wootton appeared to be reaching for a pistol. Hicks then ran toward Wootton with the shotgun raised to strike him against the head when the gun accidentally discharged and hit him. Some of the other group fired and appellant returned the fire. Hicks also fired the shotgun after hitting Wootton.
The State answers the appellant's contention that the court should have instructed the jury that Hicks was an accomplice witness as a matter of law by urging that his testimony showed an accident and did not incriminate appellant.
It is to be noted that Hicks gave damaging testimony against appellant when he testified about getting their business straight which included killing, if necessary, and that the two went armed to the place of the homicide.
When one is a co-indictee and testifies for the State against an accused, he is an accomplice witness as a matter of law.
The trial court's failure to respond to the objection was error and...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Harris v. State
...second, Valerie Rencher had been indicted as a codefendant. See Bentley v. State, 520 S.W.2d 390 (Tex.Cr.App.1975); Hendricks v. State, 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Allen v. State, 461 S.W.2d 622 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Gonzales v. State, 441 S.W.2d 539 8 Appellant submitted a special reque......
-
Blake v. State
...656 S.W.2d 453 (1983); Brown v. State, 576 S.W.2d 36 (1978); Cranfil v. State, 525 S.W.2d 518 (Tex.Crim.App.1975); Hendricks v. State, 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex.Crim.App.1974).9 Creel v. State, 754 S.W.2d 205 (1988); Kunkle v. State, 771 S.W.2d 435 (Tex.Crim.App.1986), cert. denied 492 U.S. 925, ......
-
Holladay v. State
...matter of law. See Harris v. State, 645 S.W.2d 447 (Tex.Cr.App.1983); Kerns v. State, 550 S.W.2d 91 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Hendricks v. State, 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex.Cr.App.1974). Also see the cases collated under West criminal law key number The question that we must decide is just how detailed a......
-
Hernandez v. State, 04-81-00053-CR
...v. State, 141 Tex.Cr.R. 536, 148 S.W.2d 1099 (1941). The victim's mother was an accomplice witness as a matter of law. Hendricks v. State, 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex.Cr.App.1974). Once a witness is shown to be an accomplice witness, the next step is to determine if the State has adduced adequate c......
-
Defenses and special evidentiary charges
...State , 138 Tex.Crim. 17, 133 S.W.2d 972 (Tex.Crim.App. 1939); Creek v. State , 533 S.W.2d 794 (Tex.Crim.App. 1976); Hendricks v. State , 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974). §3:310 Accomplice Witness as a Matter of Law Upon the law of accomplice witness testimony, you are instructed that w......
-
Table of cases
...Dist.] 1992, pet. ref’d) 3:10 Henderson v. State 971 S.W.2d 755 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.) 3:660 Hendricks v. State 508 S.W.2d 633 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974) 3:300 - H - Texas Criminal Jury Charges C-22 Name Citation Court Section (Tex. Crim. App. 1964) overruled by Ex Parte......