Ginn v. State

439 S.W.2d 840, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 958
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 23, 1969
Docket42054
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 439 S.W.2d 840 (Ginn 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
Ginn v. State, 439 S.W.2d 840, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 958 (Tex. 1969).

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is driving while intoxicated, second offense; the punishment, three years in the Department of Corrections.

Two grounds of error are assigned and presented in argument. The first is that the State failed to prove the allegation in the indictment that appellant drove upon “a public highway”. Highway Patrolman Morris testified that he saw the automobile appellant was driving while he was on routine patrol “on the Gladewater Highway, U.S. 271, east of Tyler”.

The cases relied upon by appellant, Spencer v. State, 118 Tex.Cr.R. 336, 42 S.W.2d 259, and Walker v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 368, 125 S.W.2d 571, relate to situations where the State specified the highway by name in the indictment and then failed to prove the specifics contained in the indictment. Ground of error #1 is overruled.

The officer testified that on the night of the arrest, appellant had a strong odor of alcohol, staggered, had difficulty in understanding the questions put to him, *841 and in his (the officer’s) opinion was intoxicated.

Appellant’s next ground of error is that the arresting officer was permitted to testify as to certain information which he secured about appellant’s age and description taken down at the scene in the form of a ticket and from which he refreshed his memory. No request was made by appellant to inspect the instrument which was not introduced in evidence and we overrule his contention that reading from the ticket constituted bolstering of his testimony.

Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction, and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Lara, Bernardo v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000
Yeary v. State
734 S.W.2d 766 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Goode v. State
685 S.W.2d 789 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Lumpkin v. State
524 S.W.2d 302 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Cozby v. State
506 S.W.2d 589 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
439 S.W.2d 840, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 958, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ginn-v-state-texcrimapp-1969.