Flores v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Flores v. State

452 S.W.2d 918, 1970 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1338

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 25, 1970

DocketNo. 42649

StatusPublished

This text of 452 S.W.2d 918 (Flores v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Flores v. State, 452 S.W.2d 918, 1970 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1338 (Tex. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is possession of heroin; the punishment, 15 years.

Appellant’s retained counsel on appeal earnestly urges this Court to consider as fundamental error the following argument of the prosecutor, which he contends constituted a comment upon the appellant’s failure to testify:

“ * * * They brought you Ramon’s testimony. They could bring you doctors; they could bring you the mother of Ramon who possibly saw him while he was using the telephone; they could have brought you the person he was talking to on the phone who we have no way of knowing or no way of obtaining that name, unless it comes from the mouth of that man — ”

“MR. MARTINEZ: Your Honor, we are going to object at this time.”

“THE COURT: Well, the jury heard the evidence. Stay in the record.”

In Howe v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 380 S.W. 2d 615, we held “We object to that, Your Honor, at this time” was not sufficient to preserve error.

We remain convinced of the soundness of our holding in Howe, and find no error preserved in the case at bar.

The judgment is affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI