Tillman v. State, 28193

Decision Date28 March 1956
Docket NumberNo. 28193,28193
Citation162 Tex.Crim. 618,288 S.W.2d 521
PartiesWinona Louise TILLMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Bernard A. Golding, Houston, for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Houston, Eugene Walton and Thomas D. White, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is the possession of heroin; the punishment, 5 years.

Officer Gray of the Narcotics Division of the City of Houston police arrested the appellant. He stated that he and his partner Stringfellow were proceeding north in an automobile on Dowling sTreet at one o'clock in the morning when they were forced to a halt because a Buick automobile ahead of them made a sudden stop. He stated that as the Buick came to a stop the appellant, whom he knew 'in connection with narcotics,' jumped out, leaving the door ajar, and hurriedly ran around the corner; that he, thinking that she might be in trouble because of her hasty departure, followed her, overtaking her as she reached an Oldsmobile automobile in the 2400 block of Dennis Street; that he shone his flashlight on her, identified himself, and asked her what her trouble was. He stated that she replied, 'Nothing,' but just at that moment she threw a piece of tissue paper into the Oldsmobile, and as it landed on the front seat a small red capsule rolled out, and that he retrieved it. At that moment Stringfellow arrived with the driver of the Buick, and the parties were carried to jail.

Stringfellow corroborated a portion of Gray's testimony, and it was shown that the red capsule contained heroin.

The appellant, testifying in her own behalf, denied the possession of any narcotics and denied that she threw anything into the Oldsmobile. She stated that the Buick had come to a normal stop at the curb, that she had descended, closed the door, and walked toward the Oldsmobile, which she had parked.

There is no evidence that the Oldsmobile belonged to the appellant.

It is insisted that the arrest of the appellant and search of the automobile were illegal and that the admission of the heroin into evidence violated her constitutional rights under the 14th Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. She further contends that the recent majority opinion of this Court in Thomas v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 288 S.W.2d 791, is authority for the reversal of this conviction.

Here we have no search of the person or...

To continue reading

Request your trial
6 cases
  • Sutton v. State, 29995
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • October 22, 1958
    ...cases of Sanders v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 312 S.W.2d 640, and Slaughter v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 314 S.W.2d 92. See also Tillman v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 618, 288 S.W.2d 521, and Garcia v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 146, 289 S.W.2d 766. Be that as it may, when the appellant offered the testimony of Of......
  • Slaughter v. State, 29827
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • May 21, 1958
    ...Sanders v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 312 S.W.2d 640, and French v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 48, 284 S.W.2d 359. See also Tillman v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 618, 288 S.W.2d 521, and Garcia v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 289 S.W.2d The judgment is affirmed. ...
  • Williams v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 20, 1960
    ...453, 293 S.W.2d 645; and Wyatt v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 134, 282 S.W.2d 392. 2. Appellant's person was not searched. Tillman v. State, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 618, 288 S.W.2d 521, and Garcia v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 146, 289 S.W.2d 3. It was Joe Wolford's home. Paige v. State, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 571, 279 S.......
  • Roberts v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • April 17, 1957
    ...after he was out of the automobile, and it was admissible. Martinez v. State, 157 Tex.Cr.R. 603, 252 S.W.2d 186, and Tillman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 288 S.W.2d 521. The automobile was not shown to belong to the appellant, and therefore he cannot question the legality of the search of the sam......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT