Johnson v. State, 38692

Citation397 S.W.2d 441
Decision Date24 November 1965
Docket NumberNo. 38692,38692
PartiesGrady JOHNSON, Jr., Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Donald W. Cantwell, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., C. M. Turlington, Malcolm Dade and W. John Allison, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

DICE, Commissioner.

The conviction is for the unlawful possession of marihuana; the punishment, fifteen years.

The state's evidence shows that on the night in question Officers Bliss and Williams saw the appellant walking on a public road in the city of Dallas. When they observed that he was 'staggering and wobbling around,' they stopped the patrol car and went to him. After engaging appellant in conversation, in which he spoke in a 'confused and slurred' manner, the officers formed the opinion that he was intoxicated and placed him under arrest. They then searched him and found some unsigned checks in his pocket which had been stamped with a check protector. Appellant was then carried to the city hall and, after being taken to the burglary, theft, and forgery sections, was taken to the jail on the fourth floor and turned over to the jail guard. Before assigning him to a cell, the guard proceeded to search appellant and, in the search, found a small cigarette in his watch pocket. After the guard, Hollman, laid the cigarette on the counter, appellant grabbed it and put it in his mouth. Hollman then seized appellant's arms and Officers Bliss and Williams came to his aid. In the struggle with the officers and as Officer Williams choked appellant with both hands, the cigarette fell from his mouth to the floor.

Officer Williams then took possession of the cigarette, placed it in an envelope with markings of identification thereon, and delivered it to the identification bureau for analysis.

An examination of the vegetable material in the cigarette by Dr. Morton F. Mason, director the Dallas city-county criminal investigation laboratory, showed that it was marihuana.

As a witness in his own behalf, appellant testified that on the night in question he was wearing his brother's trousers and did not know about the marihuana cigarette until the officer took it out of the watch pocket. He admitted trying to swallow the cigarette in an effort to dispose of it.

We find the evidence sufficient to sustain the conviction and overrule the contention that the evidence was obtained against the appellant as the result of an unlawful arrest and illegal search and seizure.

Appellant's arrest...

To continue reading

Request your trial
16 cases
  • State v. Thompson
    • United States
    • Nebraska Supreme Court
    • September 17, 1993
    ...force to a suspect as is fairly necessary to prevent an imminent destruction of evidence of the commission of crime"); Johnson v. State, 397 S.W.2d 441 (Tex.Crim.App.1965) (officer's use of both hands to choke defendant to prevent him from swallowing marijuana cigarette did not affect its a......
  • Conwell v. State
    • United States
    • Indiana Appellate Court
    • August 9, 1999
    ...398, 223 N.E.2d 321 (1966) (force not excessive when police throttled defendant to force him to expel heroin); Johnson v. State, 397 S.W.2d 441 (Tex. Crim.App.1965) (use of both hands to choke defendant in order to prevent him from swallowing marijuana did not render evidence inadmissible).......
  • Wood v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • November 6, 1974
    ...Rent v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 326, 268 S.W.2d 674 (1954); King v. State, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 231, 312 S.W.2d 501 (1958); Johnson v. State, 397 S.W.2d 441 (Tex.Cr.App.1965); Chamber v. State, 416 S.W.2d 826 (Tex.Cr.App.1967).Further, Article 725c, Vernon's Ann.P.C. 1925, in effect at the time, proh......
  • Lamb v. Cartwright, B-73-CA-347.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Texas
    • February 28, 1975
    ... ... Within the limits of the Fourth Amendment, the law of the State determines the validity of a warrantless arrest, Johnson v. United States, 333 U.S. 10, 68 S.Ct ... ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT