Wright v. State
| Decision Date | 09 January 1980 |
| Docket Number | No. 57785.,57785. |
| Citation | 591 S.W.2d 458 |
| Parties | Ralph WRIGHT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Melvyn Carson Bruder, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., John H. Hagler, Jan E. Potts and David C. Schick, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Before DOUGLAS, ROBERTS and ODOM, JJ.
Ralph Wright appeals his conviction for aggravated robbery. Punishment was assessed by the jury at fifty years.
Wright contends that his alibi witness was improperly impeached on a collateral matter with evidence that showed an extraneous offense. He also challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to prove that a deadly weapon was used.
Oscar Smith, a college student, was working at an independent service station on the evening of December 23, 1976. Appellant approached Smith, pulled a weapon which Smith referred to as a "gun", "revolver" and a "pistol", at different places in the record. Appellant demanded the money which Smith gave him. Appellant then drove off in his car.
Wright contends that this evidence does not show that a "deadly weapon" was used. The use of a "deadly weapon" is an essential element of aggravated robbery. V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 29.03. A firearm is per se a deadly weapon. V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 1.07(a)(11)(A). Appellant argues that evidence is sufficient only if the witness uses the term "firearm" or otherwise proves the use of a "deadly weapon" under one of the alternative definitions. We disagree. Testimony using any of the terms "gun", "pistol" or "revolver" is sufficient to authorize the jury to find that a deadly weapon was used.
Wright next complains of the use of a prior conviction to impeach his alibi witness on a collateral matter. Iris Wright, appellant's mother, testified that appellant was at home with her at the time of the robbery. As part of the preliminary questions asked of her on direct, the following exchange occurred:
On cross-examination, she was questioned further on this matter:
At this point, appellant objected and a hearing was held outside the presence of the jury. The State then elicited from Mrs. Wright that her son was not living with her from the summer of 1973 until sometime in 1975 because he was in prison.
In Bryant v. State, 471 S.W.2d 66 (Tex. Cr.App.1971), we were confronted with a similar situation. Bryant's alibi witness, James Duncan, testified that he and Bryant were in Arkansas at the time of the robbery. He also testified that he first met appellant in September, 1969 at a Dallas bar owned by Duncan. Duncan was asked if he knew that Bryant was in the penitentiary in September, 1969, and was not released until October 14, 1969. In overruling Bryant's contention, we held, "The question was proper to test the knowledge and credibility of appellant's witness."
In the instant case, Mrs. Wright established an alibi. Her credibility and objectivity were seriously questioned when it was shown that she made a blanket statement which was factually incorrect. This...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Brown v. State
...jury could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Brown used a firearm during the commission of the robbery. See Wright v. State, 591 S.W.2d 458, 459 (Tex.Crim.App.1979) (holding that evidence defendant pointed "gun," "pistol," or "revolver" at complainant was sufficient to prove use of ......
-
Brown v. State, No. 01-05-00074-CR (Tex. App. 8/3/2006)
...under Wright v. State that testimony by a witness that a defendant used a "gun" is enough to find that a firearm was used. 591 S.W.2d 458, 459 (Tex. Crim. App. 1979). In Wright, the defendant was in close proximity to the complainant when he pulled a weapon which the complainant referred to......
-
Leadon v. State
...to a weapon, describing it as a “gun,” a “revolver,” and a “pistol,” is sufficient to prove the use of a deadly weapon. Wright v. State, 591 S.W.2d 458, 459 (Tex.Crim.App.1979). It is true that courts have held that testimony regarding the use of a “gun” may be insufficient to support a fin......
-
Davis v. State
...inference, from the victim's testimony, that a "gun" was used in the commission of a crime and that the gun was a firearm. See Wright v. State, 591 S.W.2d 458 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1979); Joseph v. State, 681 S.W.2d 738, 739 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 1984, no pet.). Davis' threats......