Polk v. State, 44617
| Decision Date | 23 February 1972 |
| Docket Number | No. 44617,44617 |
| Citation | 476 S.W.2d 330 |
| Parties | Irene June POLK, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
James P. Finstrom, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., and Harry J. Schulz, Jr., Asst. Dist. Atty., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
This appeal is from a conviction for the offense of robbery by assault; punishment was assessed by a jury at twenty-three years.
Appellant brings forth the sufficiency of the evidence and refusal of the trial court to order the production of grand jury testimony as grounds of error.
Nolan Holmes testified that on October 25, 1969, he received his pay check and went to downtown Dallas and paid some bills. Later that evening he went to Clark's Cafe where he met the appellant. After some conversation, a little drinking, and some negotiations, they arranged to leave the cafe to fulfill a 'date'. They departed the cafe and were picked up by Cassandra Bennett who had the use of an automobile. The three of them went to a nearby service station where Holmes purchased some gasoline for the automobile. They then returned to Clark's where the owner of the automobile, Alvin Sorrells, also known as 'Trouble', was picked up. The four then proceeded to ride around trying to decide whether to go to a motel, to Holmes' house or Cassandra Bennett's house. One stop was made at a drug store where some cigarettes, cashew nuts, and either a syringe or some 'contact medicine' were purchased, all being paid for by Holmes. Sometime after midnight, it was decided to go to Cassandra Bennett's house, she preferring that the money for room rent be paid to her instead of to a motel. Holmes agreed to pay her four dollars for the use of a room so that he and the appellant could fulfill the previously arranged contract. Upon arrival at Cassandra Bennett's house, Holmes seated himself on a couch in the living room and proceeded to smoke a cigarette. The appellant and Sorrells went into the kitchen where they began either shooting dope or eating pork chops. Cassandra Bennett went into the bedroom and very shortly returned to the living room, completely nude, and began talking to Holmes. At this time, Holmes disregarded his prior arrangements with the appellant and entered into an agreement with Cassandra Bennett to have a 'date'; and they retired to the bedroom and closed the door. After the financial arrangements were completed, Cassandra Bennett got on the bed and Holmes started to undress, when...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Graham v. State
...need for such testimony to outweigh the traditional policy of grand jury secrecy. See Reed v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 393; Polk v. State, 476 S.W.2d 330; Bryant v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 423 S.W.2d 320. The appellant having failed to demonstrate a 'particularized need' for the productio......
-
Tibbetts v. State
...showing. See also Graham v. State, 486 S.W.2d 92 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Reed v. State, 456 S.W.2d 393 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Polk v. State, 476 S.W.2d 330 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Smith v. State, 455 S.W.2d 748 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Hicks v. State, 482 S.W.2d 186 (Tex.Cr.App.1972), and Lary v. State, 475 S.......
-
Torres v. State
...court to permit him to have the previous testimony for cross-examination. Hicks v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 482 S.W.2d 186; Polk v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 476 S.W.2d 330; Garcia v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 454 S.W.2d 400; Brown v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d We overrule ground of error No. 2. Ground ......
-
Hicks v. State, 45057
...Therefore, we hold that no 'special reason' or 'particularized need' for the production of such has been shown. See Polk v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 476 S.W.2d 330, and cases cited Appellant's second ground of error is overruled. By his third ground of error appellant contends that he should hav......