Johnson v. State, 42588
| Decision Date | 04 March 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 42588,42588 |
| Citation | 453 S.W.2d 828 |
| Parties | Juanita JOHNSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
John H. Regner, Houston, for appellant.
Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James Brough and Ted Hirtz, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
In a joint trial with Almo Johnson, the appellant, Juanita Johnson, was convicted for the offense of robbery by assault; her punishment of ten years was assessed by the jury.
The record reflects that Juanita Johnson was walking on South Main Street in Houston at approximately midnight. The complainant, a twenty-eight year old man, drove by and made a 'date' with her. They drove to the Penrod Motel where she got out of the car and rented the room. After they entered the room, the price of the 'date' was discussed. They heard a loud knocking on the door. Juanita Johnson opened the door and Almo Johnson, the co-defendant, entered the room, pointed a pistol at, and demanded money from, the complainant. He took a watch, a ring and $15.00 from the complainant, cursed him and asked where the rest of the money was. He then searched the complainant thoroughly, even his socks and shoes. The complainant testified that '(S)he (Juanita Johnson) was just standing there and kept telling me that I had more money and she kept telling me that I had better do it, that he means business.'
In the meantime, the operator of the motel had seen Almo Johnson go to the room and had called the officers. When the officers drove up, Almo Johnson returned the ring and watch and hid the pistol under the mattress.
The complaining witness testified that he parted with the watch, ring and money because he was in fear of his life or serious bodily harm.
The officers testified that they went to the room and talked to the co-defendants and the complainant and found the gun under the mattress.
Almo Johnson testified that he happened to be at the Stadium Drive-In, next door to the Penrod Motel, when a friend called 'Mosquito' told him that he had seen Juanita go there with a man. He then borrowed a pistol from 'Mosquito' to get his wife out of the room. He testified that he did not take the watch, ring or the money, and that he hid the pistol when the officers arrived, because it did not belong to him. He further testified that he and Juanita had obtained a license and were married in Louisiana and had a child as a result of the marriage.
Juanita Johnson testified that she and her common-law husband (Almo Johnson) had argued and had decided to separate. She left the house and later in the evening caught a ride to Main Street and stood at a bus stop momentarily. While she was there, complainant drove around the block, stopped and talked about a date with her; they finally agreed upon the price of $15.00. She suggested that they go to the Penrod Motel. When they arrived, he gave her money to pay for the room; they went to the room, talked for a while, undressed and had the date, for which he paid her $15.00. Then suddenly her husband started banging on the door and that he kept knocking until he broke in. Her husband hit her, and she ran outside where she saw the policemen. She testified that she had lived as the common-law wife of appellant for about two years and later stated that they had lived together six months or less, and that Almo had lied when he testified that they had been married for three years and had a child as a result of that marriage.
In the first ground of error, it is contended that reversible error was committed on cross-examination when she was asked if she had ever been convicted for being a prostitute. Appellant's counsel objected to the question: ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Matthews v. State
...Reynolds v. State, 101 Tex.Cr.R. 192, 274 S.W. 974 (1925); Holgin v. State, 480 S.W.2d 405, 409 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828, 830 (Tex.Cr.App.1970). On the other hand, federal cases, in construing Federal Rule of Evidence 609(a), 7 have consistently refused to allow p......
-
Husting v. State
...therefor may be used for impeachment if not too remote. See Holguin v. State, 480 S.W.2d 405 (Tex.Crim.App.1972); Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828 (Tex.Crim.App.1970); Robertson v. State, 685 S.W.2d 488, 492 (Tex.App.--Fort Worth 1985, no The present case is governed by Rule 609 of the Texa......
-
Poore v. State
...See Overton v. state, 490 S.W.2d 556 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). However, an exception to this rule has been adopted in Texas, Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828 (Tex.Cr.App.1970), and in many other jurisdictions, that a witness may be impeached with a prior conviction on the basis of the witness' own......
-
Martinez v. State, 43521
...Thus no error is presented. Gordon v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 461 S.W.2d 415; Jackson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 454 S.W.2d 733; Johnson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 453 S.W.2d 828; Ex parte Jones, The judgment is affirmed. ...
-
Civil Litigation
...v. State , 68 S.W.2d 495 (Tex. Crim. App. 1934). 20. Pruett v. State , 463 S.W.2d 191 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). 21. Johnson v. State , 453 S.W.2d 828 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). 22. In re Lock , 54 S.W.3d 305, 308 (Tex. 2001). 23. Lopez v. State , 990 S.W.2d 770 (Tex. App.-Austin 1999). 24. Villa......
-
Table of Cases
...WL 2742829, June 18, 2014, No. PD-0473-13), §15:24.1.4 Johnson v. State, 432 S.W.2d 98 (Tex. Crim. App. 1968), §20:26 Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970), §15:56.3.1 Johnson v. State, 525 S.W.2d 170 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975), §14:19.1 Johnson v. State, 583 S.W.2d 399 (Tex. ......
-
Table of Cases
...WL 2742829, June 18, 2014, No. PD-0473-13), §15:24.1.4 Johnson v. State, 432 S.W.2d 98 (Tex. Crim. App. 1968), §20:26 Johnson v. State, 453 S.W.2d 828 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970), §15:56.3.1 Johnson v. State, 525 S.W.2d 170 (Tex. Crim. App. 1975), §14:19.1 Johnson v. State, 583 S.W.2d 399 (Tex. ......