Hunter v. State
| Decision Date | 17 May 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 44616,44616 |
| Citation | 481 S.W.2d 806 |
| Parties | Don HUNTER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Jordan, Ramsey & Bradley by Scott Bradley, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Harry J. Schylz, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, and
Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
DAVIS, Commissioner.
This is an appeal from a conviction for sale of marihuana. Punishment was assessed by the jury at ten years.
The record reflects that Officer Taylor, of the Richardson Police Department, working as an undercover officer, purchased two 'lids' of marihuana from appellant on March 24, 1970, in Dallas County, for thirty dollars. The sufficiency of the evidence is not challenged.
Appellant asserts numerous grounds of error in his briefs, only two of which comply with Art. 40.09, Sec. 9, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. All other contentions are neither briefed nor discussed.
Appellant urges that the court erred in refusing to grant appellant's motion for mistrial, when witness Taylor testified that appellant had sold him LSD on March 7, 1969, for the reason that the same was an extraneous offense and prejudiced the jury to the extent that no instruction could have removed the harm.
The record reflects that on cross-examination of Officer Taylor, the following occurred:
'Q Did he sell you some on March the 7th?
'A Lou Spencer and Don Hunter (appellant) sold me some LSD on March the 7th.
'Mr. Bradley: We object to that and move--ask the court for a mistrial.'
The court sustained the objection and overruled the motion for mistrial.
Appellant urges that the sole subject on direct and cross-examination had been marihuana or 'grass' and that the examinations and responses could only lead one to rationally believe that marihuana was the subject of inquiry.
In Mays v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 428 S.W.2d 325, the following occurred on cross-examination by appellant's counsel:
'Q Mrs. Haynes, you say that he took you by the arm to the register, did he have any weapons with him?
'A I didn't see a knife the last time but the two previous times he showed a knife and pulled it on me.'
Appellant moved for a mistrial and same was overruled. This Court said:
As in Mays v. State, supra, in the instant case, no request was made by appellant for an instruction to disregard the testimony. See Howard v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 387 S.W.2d 387. Further, as in Mays v. State, supra, it was appellant rather than the state who elicited the unresponsive answer of the witness. See Rogers v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 420 S.W.2d 714. No error is shown.
Appellant complains that the classification of marihuana in the Narcotic Drug Regulations Act with its attendant punishment and sentencing provisions is arbitrary and deprives the appellant convicted thereunder of equal protection of law.
This contention was answered adversely to appellant in Reyna v. State, 1 Tex.Cr.App., 434 S.W.2d 362, where it was said:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Warren v. State
...on this point are Willoughby v. State, 481 S.W.2d 893 (Tex.Cr.App.); Finklea v. State, 481 S.W.2d 889 (Tex.Cr.App.); Hunter v. State, 481 S.W.2d 806 (Tex.Cr.App.); Sanders v. State, 482 S.W.2d 648 (Tex.Cr.App.); State ex rel. Scott v. Conaty, 187 S.E.2d 119 (W.Va.Sp.Ct. of App.); Borras v. ......
-
State v. Burrow
...on this point are Willoughby v. State, 481 S.W.2d 893 (Tex.Cr.App.); Finklea v. State, 481 S.W.2d 889 (Tex.Cr.App.); Hunter v. State, 481 S.W.2d 806 (Tex.Cr.App.); Sanders v. State, 482 S.W.2d 648 (Tex.Cr.App.); State ex rel. Scott v. Conaty, 187 S.E.2d 119 (W.Va.Sp.Ct. of App.); Borras v. ......
-
Egan v. Sheriff, Clark County
...process and equal protection of the law.' Reyna v. State, 434 S.W.2d 362, 366 (Tex.Cr.App.1968) quoted with approval in Hunter v. State, 481 S.W.2d 806 (Tex.Cr.App.1972). 3. Appellants' final contention is that since the grand jury indictment was not returned until February 17, 1972, and N.......
-
Lewis v. State
...if an instruction could have cured the alleged error. Cruz v. State, 225 S.W.3d 546, 548 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007); Hunter v. State, 481 S.W.2d 806, 807 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972). As shown above, Lewis's defense counsel, though given the opportunity to pursue his request for an instruction to disrega......