Mitchell v. State, 42877
| Decision Date | 10 June 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 42877,42877 |
| Citation | 455 S.W.2d 266 |
| Parties | Albert Charles MITCHELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
John K. Coil, Dallas (court-appointed on appeal only), for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., John B. Tolle, Camille Elliott, W. T. Westmoreland, Jr., and Harry J. Schulz, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for murder; the punishment was assessed by the court at 15 years.
The evidence is undisputed that the appellant shot and killed Johnny Jackson with a pistol. After the State had rested its case, the appellant testified that he had known Johnny 'Mutt' Jackson for a year or two, and that they were having some trouble because he (appellant) had 'cut up' Jackson's stepson. About a week before the homicide, Jackson wanted the appellant to have a drink with him at a cafe, and the appellant refused and this made Jackson angry. The appellant testified that on the day of the homicide that Ben Taylor, 'Big Man', Johhny Jackson and he went to his (appellant's) house to shoot dice and that they were there some forty-five minutes and Jackson picked up some of appellant's money on two or three occasions; that when Taylor told Jackson that he should not do that, Jackson became angry, went outside, turned around, kicked the door open and came toward appellant with a knife and stated, 'I am going to stick my knife in you like you did my Son in law. * * *' Appellant then reached under the bed, got the pistol and began to shoot Jackson but stopped shooting when Jackson turned and stopped coming toward him.
Irene Hogan, appellant's grandmother, testified that she was at the house where the homicide was committed and that appellant and only one other man (the deceased) entered and that the two men were there approximately five minutes before the shooting.
Dr. Earl Forrest Rose, a pathologist, testified that he examined the body of the deceased and found three recent gunshot wounds: one in the side of the head, one in the collarbone, one through the chest. (He also found scar tissue and a fourth bullet in the abdominal area of the deceased which were there as a result of an earlier gunshot wound.)
Appellant, in his sole ground of error, complains that the trial court should have granted a mistrial during cross-examination when the prosecutor asked Annie May Robinson, appellant's mother: 'Which one of Mutt's (the deceased's) brothers were you sleeping with?' and she answered, 'I don't know.'
Mrs. Robinson testified that some six days before the homicide she was operating the Gas Lounge when Johnny Jackson came in...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Graham v. State
...No error is shown. Alexander v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 476 S.W.2d 10; Bitela v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 463 S.W.2d 738; Mitchell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 266; 5 Tex.Jur.2d Appeal and Error--Criminal, § 437. Additionally, the appellant did not attempt to show that the questions were asked ......
-
Williams v. State, 49781
...The question was never answered. This Court seldom reverses a conviction solely because an improper question is asked. Mitchell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 266. We do not find the question, standing alone, to be so harmful that the instruction of the court would not cure Appellant's n......
-
Gleffe v. State
...of an improper question unless it was obviously harmful to the accused. Smith v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 457 S.W.2d 58; Mitchell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 266; Mirowitz v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 449 S.W.2d 475, and Sensabaugh v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 426 S.W.2d The record does not reflect th......
-
Hill v. State
...on improper question unless the question is obviously harmful to the accused. Smith v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 457 S.W.2d 58; Mitchell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 266; Mirowitz v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 449 S.W.2d 475; White v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 444 S.W.2d 921; Sensabaugh v. State, Tex.Cr.......