Maldonado v. State, 43818
Decision Date | 02 June 1971 |
Docket Number | No. 43818,43818 |
Citation | 467 S.W.2d 468 |
Parties | Noe Ramirez MALDONADO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Glenn Goodnight, Fort Worth, (on appeal only), Curry & Curry by Tim Curry, Fort Worth, (court appointed on appeal only), for appellant.
Frank Coffey, Dist. Atty., Ben H. Tompkins, Otto Stephani, Jr. and R. W. Crampton, Asst. Dist. Attys., Fort Worth, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This appeal is from a conviction for the offense of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug, to-wit: heroin. A plea of guilty was entered before a jury and the jury assessed punishment at 20 years.
Appellant contends that it was error to admit testimony of two witnesses that his reputation for being a peaceful and law abiding citizen in the community where he resided was bad.
Bobby Adams, an employee of the Department of Public Safety, assigned to the Narcotics Section, testified as follows:
On re-direct examination:
'Q. (By Mr. Stephanie, the Prosecutor) Have you talked to these people who are known narcotic addicts about the reputation of this man?
'A. Yes sir.
'Q. Is this a part of what you base your opinion on?
'A. Yes sir.
On re-cross examination:
W. W. Bullock, a Ft. Worth Police Officer assigned to the Narcotics Division, testified as follows:
'MR. STEPHANIE: Pass the witness.'
On cross-examination:
'A. 300 West Exchange.
Raising the objection for the first time on appeal, appellant contends that by their testimony they (the two officers) were not shown to have been acquainted with his reputation in the community in which he resides.
The record reflects that no objection was made to the introduction of the said testimony and no request was made to strike the same. Therefore, there is no error. Kerrigan v. State, 167 Tex.Cr.R. 601, 321 S.W.2d 884.
Further, the testimony was merely cumulative to that given by Officers D. W. Bransom and Jack Cox, of the Narcotics Section of the Ft. Worth Police Department, a part of which is hereinafter quoted from the transcript of the court reporter's notes:
And on cross-examination:
Officer Cox testified as follows:
No objection was made to this testimony and the same is not brought forward as a ground of error on appeal, hence, no error is shown.
Appellant's ground of error is overruled.
Appellant's pro se brief has been examined. He complains of the lack of probable cause to issue a search warrant; denial of speedy arraignment and of bond; legality of the grand jury; conspiracy to violate his rights; and, a general dislike for the informer. These complaints, raised for the first time on appeal, are clearly without merit.
This court has held on numerous occasions that a plea of guilty to a felony charge before a jury admits the existence of all facts necessary to establish guilt. In such cases, the introduction of testimony is to enable the jury to consider the same in assessing the punishment. Durham v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 466 S.W.2d 758 (4--7--71); Swanson v. State, Tex.Cr.App.,447 S.W.2d 942; Glenn v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 442 S.W.2d 360; Lewis v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 438 S.W.2d 816; Reyna v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 434 S.W.2d 362; Darden v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 430 S.W.2d 494; Bendaw v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 429 S.W.2d 506; Williams v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 422 S.W.2d 450; ...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Hoffman v. State, 48353
...for review. Ochoa v. State, 481 S.W.2d 847 (Tex.Cr.App. 1972); Blake v. State, 468 S.W.2d 400 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971); Maldonado v. State, 467 S.W.2d 468 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971). Subsequent to the complained of statement, the appellant's counsel cross-examined the policeman, and the record shows the ......
-
Ochoa v. State, 45305
...to the line of interrogation now complained of and, thus, the error, if any, is not properly preserved for review. Maldonado v. State, 467 S.W.2d 468 (Tex.Cr.App.1971). Cf. Blake v. State, 468 S.W.2d 400 Secondly, there is no proof that the appellant was not, in fact, represented by counsel......
-
Cleveland v. State
...cited. See also Reyna v. State, 434 S.W.2d 362 (Tex.Cr.App.1968); Renesto v. State, 452 S.W.2d 498 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Maldonado v. State, 467 S.W.2d 468 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Weaver v. State, 476 S.W.2d 326 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); 11 Tex.Digest, Criminal Law, Sec. Appellant does not challenge this ......
-
Lichtenwalter v. State, 52619
...530 S.W.2d 558; Hawkins v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 505 S.W.2d 578; Compton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 500 S.W.2d 131; Maldonado v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 468; Lassere v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 458 S.W.2d 81; Merx v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 450 S.W.2d No objection was made to Nesbett's testimony. T......