Foster v. State

455 S.W.2d 243, 1970 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1332
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 17, 1970
DocketNo. 42942
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 455 S.W.2d 243 (Foster 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
Foster v. State, 455 S.W.2d 243, 1970 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1332 (Tex. 1970).

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is robbery with a prior conviction of burglary to commit theft alleged for enhancement; the punishment was assessed by the jury at life.

The sufficiency of the evidence is not challenged.

Appellant’s first ground of error is that Articles 62, 63, and 64, Vernon’s Ann. P.C., have been repealed by implication. We have very recently held against such a contention in Cherry v. State, 447 S.W.2d 154 at p. 157.

Appellant’s second ground of error is that the court erred in his charge when he told the jury, “You are the exclusive judge of the facts proved. * * * ”

No such objection was made to the charge and the question is not before us for review, Smith v. State, 437 S.W.2d 835. The ground is clearly without merit. See Willson, Texas Criminal Forms, Sec. 3452 (7th Ed.).

Appellant’s third ground of error is so general that it does not meet the re[244]*244quirements of Article 40.09, Sec. 9, V.A.C. C.P., so. as to present anything for review.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Cleaver v. State
498 S.W.2d 945 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
455 S.W.2d 243, 1970 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1332, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/foster-v-state-texcrimapp-1970.