Workman v. State
| Citation | 170 Tex.Crim. 621,343 S.W.2d 446 |
| Decision Date | 01 March 1961 |
| Docket Number | No. 33075,33075 |
| Parties | Ed WORKMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Court of Appeals of Texas. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas |
[170 TEXCRIM 621] James F. Moore, Lubbock, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Appellant was tried in the County Court of Cochran County, before a special judge and a jury, upon complaint and information alleging that he committed an aggravated assault upon Raymond Kuykendall, a special deputy sheriff who was in the discharge of his official duties.
Appellant sought to have the jury instructed to acquit if they found that Kuykendall was not a special deputy sheriff discharging his official duties, but the court submitted both aggravated assault and simple assault.
[170 TEXCRIM 622] The jury returned the following verdict: 'Guilty of simple assault, and we the jurors assess the defendant fine maximum Penalty.'
The judgment rendered and entered recites that the following verdict was returned and entered: 'We, the jury, find the defendant Ed Workman guilty, and assess a fine of $25.00 and Court cost of $58.30.'
Following this verdict, the judgment from which this appeal is prosecuted recites:
'It is therefore considered, ordered, and adjudged by the court that the defendant, Ed Workman, be immediately discharged from all further liability upon the charge for which he has herein been tried and that he go hence without day.'
The judgment rendered in effect upheld appellant's contention that he was entitled to acquittal if not found guilty of aggravated assault.
In any event, the judgment appearing in the transcript is not a judgment of conviction from which an appeal may be taken to this court.
The appeal is dismissed.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Shumake
...a judgment of conviction. See McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex.App.--Fort Worth 1996, no pet.) (citing Workman v. State, 170 Tex.Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961)). A court of appeals does not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been ex......
-
Robinson v. State
...only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v.State, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); Skillern v. State, 355 S.W.3d 262, 266 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd); Saliba v. State, 45 S.W.3d 329, 329 ......
-
Skillern v. State
...any convictions for counts I, II, IV, V, or VI. Accordingly, we have no jurisdiction over these counts.2 See Workman v. State, 170 Tex.Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (Tex.1961) (dismissing defendant's appeal of judgment discharging defendant from charge because it was not a judgment of conv......
-
Rodriguez v. State
...jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of conviction. Workman v. State, 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State, 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Exceptions to the general rule include......