Stokes v. State, 68526
Decision Date | 26 October 1983 |
Docket Number | No. 68526,68526 |
Parties | Dwight Derome STOKES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
This is an appeal from a conviction for felony theft. Punishment was assessed at ten years and a fine of $444.11.
In one of his grounds of error appellant complains of denial of his motion to dismiss for failure to provide a speedy trial under Art. 32A.02, V.A.C.C.P. Under the provisions of that statute a felony should be brought to trial within 120 days of commencement of the criminal action. In this case the criminal action commenced on December 13, 1979, when the indictment was filed. Trial commenced in September of 1980, long after expiration of the 120 days. Before trial a hearing was held on appellant's motion to dismiss filed pursuant to the statute. The court asked "Does the State have anything in that regard?" The following exchange between the prosecutor and the court reflects the full extent of inquiry before the trial court overruled the motion:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
DeVaughn v. State
...standpoint, it could not have been ready for trial, under Article 32A.02 without the presence of the appellant. See Stokes v. State, 666 S.W.2d 493, 494 (Tex.Crim.App.1983); Newton v. State, supra at 531; see also Lyles v. State, 636 S.W.2d 268, 271 (Tex.App.--El Paso 1982), aff'd, 653 S.W.......
-
Miguez v. State, B14-85-403-CR
...standpoint, it could not have been ready for trial under article 32A.02 without the presence of appellant. Stokes v. State, 666 S.W.2d 493, 494 (Tex.Crim.App.1983); Newton v. State, 641 S.W.2d 530, 531 In Lyles v. State, the Court held that a negligent mistake in the sheriff's office did no......
-
Wright v. State
...October 29, 1978, the State's announcement of ready on July 3, 1978, became ineffective for Speedy Trial Act purposes. Stokes v. State, 666 S.W.2d 493 (Tex.Cr.App.1983); Lee v. State, supra; Newton v. State, supra. The State, however, made no such showing; thus, since the State failed to ex......
-
Behrend v. State
...[14th] 1983, pet. ref'd). Certainly, without the presence of the defendant the State cannot be prepared for trial, Stokes v. State, 666 S.W.2d 493 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). The time limits within which the State must be ready may be tolled, however, if the defendant is absent under certain circums......