Hughes v. State, 42692
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
| Writing for the Court | DOUGLAS |
| Citation | 455 S.W.2d 303 |
| Parties | Robert Allen HUGHES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Docket Number | No. 42692,42692 |
| Decision Date | 20 May 1970 |
Turman & Mitchell, by Joel B. Mitchell, Austin, for appellant.
Robert O. Smith, Dist. Atty., Robert A. Huttash and Herman C. Gotcher, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Austin, and Jim D. Vollers, Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for murder; the punishment, life.
George Tarver, the deceased, was shot and killed with a .38 caliber pistol at Maggie's Door, a bar on South Congress Avenue in Austin. The record reflects that some five construction workers, including the appellant and the deceased, had been drinking before they went to the bar and there they continued to drink. Charles Thomas Berry who was seated at a booth heard the shot, looked up, saw Tarver fall to the floor and appellant with a pistol in his hand. He then saw appellant and another leave through the back door. Other witnesses corroborated Berry's testimony. The evidence is sufficient to support the conviction.
Complaint is made that the court erred in refusing to quash the indictment, because it contained allegations of two separate and distinct offenses. He further contends that the State was not required to elect upon which count it would proceed.
In the first count, it was alleged that appellant, with malice aforethought, killed George Tarver by shooting him with a pistol. In the second count, it was alleged that appellant, while in premises covered by a permit and license issued under the provisions of the Texas Liquor Control Act, did then and there unlawfully carry on and about his person a pistol. It was also alleged in the second count that appellant had been convicted of two felonies less than capital prior to the commission of the offense under Article 63, Vernon's Ann.P.C., our habitual offender statute.
The court overruled the motion to quash the indictment. The State elected at the time it rested at the guilt stage of the trial to proceed under the first or murder count of the indictment.
Appellant relies upon Brown v. State, 74 Tex.Cr.R. 234, 167 S.W. 1107 (1914), and quotes the following language:
'* * * no one would contend that under an indictment for murder a person could be tried for unlawfully carrying a pistol or that they were the same offense. * * *'
The Court held:
'* * * That he unlawfully carried the pistol at the time and with which he killed a person, was tried, and acquitted therefor, could not and would not be former jeopardy for unlawfully carrying a pistol. * * *'
The case dealt with former acquittal and is not in point. 1
In the present case the question presented is: Can the offense of murder be charged in one count and the felony offense of unlawfully carrying a pistol in the premises covered by a permit under the Liquor Control Act in another count of the same indictment?
Article 21.24, V.A.C.C.P., provides that an indictment may contain as many counts charging the same offense as the attorney who prepares it, acting in good faith, may think necessary to insert, but may not charge more than one offense.
In Breeden v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 438 S.W.2d 105, one count of the indictment alleged murder with malice; a second count alleged robbery with firearms. There it was contended that the allegation of two distinct offenses violated Article 21.24, supra. The Court quoted from ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Drake v. State, 148-84
...Breeden v. State, 438 S.W.2d 105, 107 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); Steambarge v. State, 440 S.W.2d 68, 70 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); Hughes v. State, 455 S.W.2d 303, 305 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Brown v. State, 475 S.W.2d 938, 945-946 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Ex parte Easley, 490 S.W.2d 570, 571 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Tibbe......
-
Ochoa v. Estelle, SA-73-CA-132.
...act by the prosecution under state procedure amounted to an election to prosecute only the offense of possession. See Hughes v. State, 455 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Stephens v. State, 522 S.W.2d 924 3 Tex.Const. Art. 1, § 14; Art. 1, § 10; Tex. Code Crim.Proc. Art. 27.05 (Acts 1965 59th......
-
Tibbetts v. State, 45957
...Rose v. State, 427 S.W.2d 609 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Steambarge v. State, 440 S.W.2d 68 (Tex.Cr.App.1969). See Hughes v. State, 455 S.W.2d 303 The court did not err in refusing to require the State to elect prior to trial upon which count of the indictment it would proceed. Appellant further co......
-
Chappell v. State, s. 48820
...which count of the indictment they would go to the jury with before admitting the aforementioned extraneous offenses. In Hughes v. State, 455 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1970) it was held that the State's election at the time it rested at the guilt-innocence stage of the trial was not error. The......