Jones v. State

Decision Date02 November 1960
Docket NumberNo. 32323,32323
Citation170 Tex.Crim. 171,339 S.W.2d 677
PartiesOra Bell JONES, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Glenn Polk, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Criminal Dist. Atty., Jack Hampton, Roger Turner, Phil Burleson, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated; the punishment, three days in jail and a fine of $75.

Trial was before the court without the intervention of a jury.

The witness Krodel testified that as he made a turn an automobile driven by apellant ran into the side of his automobile, that as he approached appellant's automobile she was seated under the steering wheel and told him 'that she had had a couple of beers and she had rather not call the law.' The witness refused to express an opinion that appellant was intoxicated.

Officer Hawkins testified that he arrived upon the scene of the collison, found appellant seated in the driver's seat of one of the automobiles, that she told him she had been driving, that he smelled alcohol on her breath, that her speech was 'confused or slurred,' that she walked with a slight stagger, 'a little abnormal,' and expressed the opinion that she was intoxicated. He stated that he gave her an intoximeter test, the preliminary examination of which indicated intoxication, and that the test was turned in to the Crime Laboratory.

Officer Parker, who arrived after Hawkins had placed appellant in the police automobile, testified that he smelled alcohol on appellant's breath and noticed that her face was flushed and she 'did talk with a slight coherent speech.'

Dr. Morton Mason testified that a laboratory examination of the intoximater test taken from appellant showed that she had a concentration of 0.198 percent of alcohol in her blood, which was indicative of intoxication.

Appellant did not testify or offer any evidence in her own behalf.

Appellant's three bills of exception relate to the admissibility of Officer Hawkins' testimony concerning his conversation with appellant upon his arrival at the scene, his observations of her, and his later conversation with her about taking the intoximeter test. We have concluded that under the holdings of this Court in Ward v. State, 148 Tex.Cr.R. 96, 184 S.W.2d 925; Clifton v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 655, 246 S.W.2d 201; McGill v. State, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 163, 253 S.W.2d 667; and Piester v. State, 161...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Reid v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 15 Abril 1964
    ...were admissible as part of the res gestae under the authority of Howell v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.App. 545, 352 S.W.2d 110; Jones v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.App. 171, 339 S.W.2d 677; and Lamkin v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 99, 123 S.W.2d Appellant's next complaint is to the testimony of Lieutenant Lord and......
  • Hoyer v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 2 Noviembre 1960

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