Jones v. State, 37774
| Decision Date | 10 March 1965 |
| Docket Number | No. 37774,37774 |
| Citation | 388 S.W.2d 429 |
| Parties | Aaron Evert JONES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
O'Connor & Brister, Lubbock, on appeal only, for appellant.
Alton R. Griffin, Dist. Atty., William M. Laubach, Asst. Dist. Atty., Lubbock, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The offense is felony theft; the punishment, enhanced by two prior convictions for felonies less than capital, life.
The indictment alleged the theft of a Cadillac automobile of the value of more than $50, from Gene Alderson on or about June 1, 1964.
The state relied upon circumstantial evidence to prove that appellant was a principal in the theft of the Cadillac.
The evidence reveals that a '62 Cadillac automobile of the value of over $50 was stolen from the lot of the Alderson Cadillac Company in Lubbock. Gene Alderson was a partner and general manager of the company. A 1964 Pontiac Tempest was stolen from Quinn Connelley Pontiac Company about the same time.
The Cadillac was found in the parking lot of an apartment house with license plates changed. Officers were assigned to watch it. The 1964 Pontiac was found in another similar parking space.
A request from 'Evert Jones' for the issuance of Alabama license plates for a Cadillac and a Pontiac, which came from Lubbock, was reported to police and when appellant received the envelope containing the license plates at the Post Office in Lubbock he was followed as he left in a '57 Pontiac automobile driven by an unidentified man.
Hours later, Ernest Carl Lieske got out of the '57 Pontiac and into the Cadillac and drove it away, following said Pontiac. Officers pursued and stopped both cars. Appellant was driving the '57 Pontiac. In it were found a money order receipt for money sent to the licensing agency in Alabama; receipt from Western Union and, in an envelope addressed to Evert Jones, Alabama License Tags for the Cadillac and the 1964 Pontiac.
There was evidence that appellant had visited the Cadillac Company lot and expressed interest in buying the Cadillac a day or so before it disappeared.
The prior convictions alleged for enhancement purposes were proved as alleged.
Appellant's court appointed counsel on appeal concedes that none of the errors claimed were preserved by proper objection. He points to certain hearsay evidence concerning the policies of the State of Alabama in issuing license plates; evidence concerning how the thefts occurred; claimed errors in argument and comments by the court, to none of which objection was made.
It is also contended that the search of the automobile in which appellant was riding when arrested and the seizure of the Alabama license plates and registration receipts was unlawful and the evidence obtained thereby was inadmissible, and no objection was made.
The principal ground upon which reversal is sought is the incompetency or inadequacy of his representation by trial counsel, which it is contended reduced the trial to a farce and a mockery of justice.
Appellant was represented at his trial by counsel of his own choosing; a member of the State Bar of Texas practicing at Lubbock.
Whether his failures to object to inadmissible evidence were honest mistakes or were a part of trial strategy, there is an abundance of evidence aside from that pointed out as objectionable to sustain the jury's verdict. Nor do we agree that a timely objection to the court's remark or the remarks of counsel for the state in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hernandez v. State
...117 Tex.Cr.R. 558, 37 S.W.2d 156 (Tex.Cr.App.1931). See also Fletcher v. State, 396 S.W.2d 393 (Tex.Cr.App.1965), and Jones v. State, 388 S.W.2d 429 (Tex.Cr.App.1965), two cases decided shortly after Gideon v. Wainwright, supra, where a showing of harm was required of defendants asserting i......
-
Henry v. State
...Commonwealth ex rel. Fox v. Maroney, 417 Pa. 308, 207 A.2d 810 (1965), (failure to object to confession). In the case of Jones v. State, 388 S.W.2d 429, 430 (1965), (Texas Ct. of Crim.App.), the Court said: 'This Court has consistently held that in the absence of a timely objection, complai......
-
Hendrix v. State, 44201
...of evidence absent a showing of no opportunity to object waives error. See Clark v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 470 S.W.2d 869; Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 388 S.W.2d 429; James v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 526, 335 S.W.2d 603, and 5 Tex.Jur.2d, Section The appellant also complains of the admission int......
-
Fletcher v. State, 38454
...to the record of appellant's trial and are informed in the brief that the ability of the same counsel was questioned in Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 388 S.W.2d 429. The constitutional right to counsel does not mean errorless counsel or counsel judged ineffective by The testimony which it is......