Waddle v. State, 42494
| Decision Date | 07 January 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 42494,42494 |
| Citation | 448 S.W.2d 472 |
| Parties | Perry David WADDLE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Jack Hampton, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., and John B. Tolle, Camille Elliott, James P. Finstrom, Jay Mills and Kenneth Blassingame, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
The conviction is for robbery; the punishment, life.
The sole ground urged for reversal is that the prosecutor in his closing argument to the jury commented upon the appellant's failure to testify.
The appellant did not testify.
The arguments relied upon for reversal are set out in appellant's brief. They are as follows:
'Not one witness that took that stand told you that is not the man.'
'The only witness that took that stand for identification told you 'that is the man'.'
'Not one witness said, that mounted that stand, told you that he was not there.'
The jury argument containing that quoted above was:
'There is only oen issue is this case. Let's cut all of the frosting off of it and get down to it. Is this him sitting right over here, Perry David Waddle, is that the man? Not one witness that took that stand told you that is not the man.
Appellant's attorney
There were no objections to the jury argument above set out which is urged for reversal.
The testimony of the state reveals that as the assaulted party parked her car in front of the apartment house where she lived about 1:30 a.m., the robber parked his car nearby, and followed her to a landing on the stairway, where he seized her, dragged her into the yard, and took her purse and money. At this time a man on the balcony yelled and then pursued the robber as he ran from the scene but never apprehended him. The person with whom appellant was living testified that appellant told her that George Gann brought him home about 10:30 p.m., and after parking his car he 'went out with the boys' (Gann and David Sharp) and returned to her house at 4 a.m.
These facts reveal two witnesses (Gann and Sharp) whose testimony could account for the appellant's whereabouts at the time of the robbery. Although the indictment was returned September 25, 1967, and the trial of the case was postponed five times before it went to trial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Miller v. State
...367 S.W.2d 688; 56 Tex.Jur.2d Trial, Sec. 261, p. 599. See also Johnson v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 381, 341 S.W.2d 453; Waddle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 448 S.W.2d 472. In the complained of argument the prosecutor merely asked why the appellant had not called Freddie Lewis who he testified had ta......
-
Ford v. State, 44655
...the argument in the case at bar to be harmless error. See also Jackson v. State, 454 S.W.2d 733 (Tex.Cr.App.1970) and Waddle v. State, 448 S.W.2d 472 (Tex.Cr.App.1970). The judgment in this record recites that the appellant entered a plea of guilty before the court and waived certain consti......
-
Roberts v. State, 46280
...could have been applied to the failure of appellant to offer evidence as to where he was at the time of the robbery. Waddle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 448 S.W.2d 472, quotes from Glass v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 411 S.W.2d 728, as 'To constitute an indirect reference to the failure of defendant to ......