Murry v. State, 40140
| Citation | 413 S.W.2d 117 |
| Decision Date | 08 March 1967 |
| Docket Number | No. 40140,40140 |
| Parties | Curlee MURRY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
Richard H. Caldwell, Houston, for appellant.
Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., James C. Brough, and Joseph P. Witherspoon, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
After waiver of a jury, the appellant entered a plea of not guilty before the court to the charge of robbery by assault. On March 24, 1966, the appellant was found guilty and his punishment was assessed at fifteen years.
The testimony of the state reveals the robbery of the operator of a service station about 3 a.m. The defense was alibi.
The appellant insists that this cause should be reversed on the ground that the evidence is insufficient to identify him as the person who committed the robbery alleged.
Jim Holladay, the alleged assaulted party, testified in part as follows:
'A I had a colored man come into the service station and said that he had run out of gas down the street from me. He had a two-gallon can in his hand and he asked me if he could have a couple of gallons of gas, and I said 'Yes.' I gave him the gas, and he handed me a ten-dollar bill and I started to make change for it. When I started to hand him the change, he said, 'Give me the rest,' and pointed a gun at me.
'Q Do you see the person who robbed you in this courtroom today?
'A Yes, sir.
'Q Would you point him out, please?
'A Sitting there beside his attorney.
'The State: Let the record reflect that the witness has pointed out the defendant, Curlee Murry.
'Q Now, let me ask you this: Are you positive of that identification?
'A Yes, sir.
'Q How far away was he?
'A Maybe four Foot.
'Q Did you have lights in that little--I believe you call it the 'doghouse'?
'A Yes, sir, lights all around and inside, both.
'Q Did you have a good chance to take a good look at his face?
'A Yes, sir.'
On cross-examination, the witness Holladay testified:
'Q And the 20th of September of '65 you only saw him as best you recall for about three or four minutes?
'A Approximately.
'Q And some portion of that time you, of course, were not observing him, but were making other motions, were you not? Getting money, turning around, making change?
'A When the man come in, I knew what he was going to do, because I had been warned by the police what to look for. I felt when I Seen the man coming that that's...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Haywood v. State, 47877
...the time of the crime. This Court will give great weight to the positive identification of a defendant by the victim. In Murry v. State, 413 S.W.2d 117 (Tex.Cr.App.1967), the positive identification of the victim was held to be sufficient to sustain the conviction of robbery in a situation ......
-
Henry v. State
...was the guilty party. Ramirez v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 494, 335 S.W.2d 228; Gibson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 411 S.W.2d 735; Murry v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 413 S.W.2d 117. Appellant's first four grounds of error are In his fifth ground of error appellant contends that the trial court erred in pro......
-
Washington v. State, 45034
...Northcutt v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 935 (No. 44,639, March 8, 1972); Cain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 436; Murry v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 413 S.W.2d 117; Robertson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 418 S.W.2d Appellant's sixth ground of error claims that the court erred in failing to grant......
-
Robertson v. State, 40515
...of $270. Appellant's contention that the evidence identifying him as one of the robbers is insufficient is without merit. Murry v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 413 S.W.2d 117. Appellant's remaining grounds for reversal relate to the sufficiency of the evidence and the admissibility of evidence offer......