Patton v. State, 42693
| Decision Date | 04 February 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 42693,42693 |
| Citation | 450 S.W.2d 856 |
| Parties | R. A. PATTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
No attorney on appeal for appellant.
Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This is an appeal from an order revoking probation.
The appellant, on April 21, 1969, entered a plea of guilty to an indictment charging him with the offense of murder with malice and was assessed a term of ten years in the penitentiary. Imposition of the sentence was suspended, and appellant was granted probation with one of the conditions being that he commit no offense against the laws of this State.
On June 11, 1969, a motion to revoke the probation was filed alleging that appellant had violated the above condition in that on the 8th day of June, 1969, he did carry on or about his person a pistol. After a hearing, the trial judge found, among other grounds, that appellant did violate the law and the above condition of his probation, and an order was entered revoking probation.
The record reflects that appellant was arrested while carrying on or about his person a pistol, which supports the finding of the trial court.
In an appeal from an order revoking probation, the review by this Court is limited to determining whether the trial judge abused his discretion in ordering such revocation. Hilton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 443 S.W.2d 844; Torres v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 403 S.W.2d 135, and Whitt v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 395 S.W.2d 39.
No abuse of discretion by the trial judge has been shown; the judgment revoking probation is affirmed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Branch v. State, 45129
...probation. Briones v. State, 473 S.W.2d 39 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Gonzalez v. State, 456 S.W.2d 53 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Patton v. State, 450 S.W.2d 856 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Wilkerson v. State, 395 S.W.2d 618 We find the trial judge did not abuse his discretion in revoking probation; the judgment is......
-
Perkins v. State, 47780
...478 S.W.2d 937; Armstrong v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 472 S.W.2d 150; Branch v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 465 S.W.2d 160; Patton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 450 S.W.2d 856.4 See Hilts v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 476 S.W.2d 283, fn. 1, where this court, speaking through Presiding Judge Onion, calls attention to ......
-
Aguilar v. State, 44029
...is limited to a determination of whether the court abused its discretion, Fields v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 449 S.W.2d 260; Patton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 450 S.W.2d 856; Manning v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 412 S.W.2d 656; Torres v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 403 S.W.2d 135, and that the appellate court is ......
-
Farmer v. State
...E.g. Armstrong v. State, 472 S.W.2d 150 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971); Branch v. State, 465 S.W.2d 160 (Tex.Cr.App. 1971); Patton v. State, 450 S.W.2d 856 (Tex.Cr.App. 1970); Pitts v. State, 442 S.W.2d 389 (Tex.Cr.App. 1969). In this case, we find there was not. In a hearing of this type, the trial ju......