Hilliard v. State

401 S.W.2d 814, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1029
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 23, 1966
Docket38240
StatusPublished
Cited by16 cases

This text of 401 S.W.2d 814 (Hilliard 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
Hilliard v. State, 401 S.W.2d 814, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1029 (Tex. 1966).

Opinion

*815 DICE, Commissioner.

Appellant and Chester C. Divine, alias “Andy” Divine, Roy Dean Berger, A. L. Phipps, Mary Alice Zaid, and Alfred Divine were jointly charged by indictment with the offense of felony theft.

The indictment alleged that on or about the 14th day of August, 1963, the defendants did fraudulently take and steal $111.25 in money from one O. C. Jones.

Upon the granting of a severance, the appellant was separately tried and convicted and his punishment assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for a term of ten years.

The statement of facts in narrative form was prepared and certified by the trial judge after the parties were unable to agree upon one within seventy-five days after the giving of notice of appeal.

We first overrule appellant’s contention that the judgment should be reversed because he has been deprived of a statement of facts in question-and-answer form, as requested in his pauper’s affidavit filed in the cause.

The record reflects that notice of appeal was given on March 25,1964.

Soon thereafter, appellant’s counsel contacted the court reporter, M. I. Mondshine, relative to the cost of a statement of facts and, after being apprised of the cost, advised that his client could only pay for the same at the rate of $100 per week. The court reporter agreed to furnish the statement of facts and commence transcribing his notes as soon as the first down payment of $100 was made. The official court reporter was not thereafter paid any money and no further request to furnish the statement of facts was made of him.

On June 23, 1964, and September 17, 1964, motions were filed by appellant to extend the time for filing the statement of facts. Orders entered by the court on such motions extended the time for filing to November 17, 1964.

On November 12, 1964, appellant filed in the cause his pauper’s oath requesting that the court reporter prepare a statement of facts in question-and-answer form. On such date it was so ordered by the court.

Subsequently, motions for extension of time to file the statement of facts were filed by appellant, which motions were granted and orders entered by the court extending the time for filing to July 12, 1965.

On July 12, 1965, a hearing was held by the court relative to the preparation of the statement of facts, at which time it was ascertained that the court reporter’s notes had been lost. It was shown at the hearing that the tenure of the court reporter had terminated on April 15, 1964, and that his notes taken in the case had been lost subsequent to that date. It was further shown that the state had prepared a statement of facts to which appellant’s counsel would not agree and that counsel for appellant declined to prepare a statement of facts.

Thereupon, the trial court announced that the court would prepare a statement of facts — which is the statement of facts now filed in the record.

While appellant was entitled to a statement of facts in question-and-answer form under the provisions of Art. 759a, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., upon the filing of a pauper’s oath, it was incumbent upon him to exercise due diligence to procure the same. Murphy v. State, 129 Tex.Cr.R. 623, 91 S.W.2d 738. The delay of nearly eight months in filing the pauper’s oath after giving notice of appeal does not reflect the exercise of diligence. Had the pauper’s oath been filed before the court reporter left office on April 15, 1964, the statement of facts could have been furnished in question-and-answer form. Under the record, a reversal of the conviction is not called for, and the contention is overruled.

The state’s proof shows that appellant was Grand Master of the National King Solomon Lodge, A.F and AM, U. S. A., of Houston, Texas, and also a co-owner of the *816 subordinate Golden Eagle Lodge No. 1. A1 Phipps was employed by appellant, selling memberships in the Golden Eagle Lodge.

O. C. Jones testified that on July 31, 1963, he gave Phipps $85 as the “first payment” for membership in the Golden Eagle Lodge after Phipps had induced him to join that organization. He testified:

“I told him * * * I wanted to be a mason, and that further, I wanted to visit my father’s lodge and the lodges of my friends * * * Phipps replied that not only could I visit these lodges, that I would be welcome in any Masonic Lodge anywhere in the world. Phipps told me that once a person was made a Mason that he could visit any other lodge or transfer his membership to any other lodge.”

On August 13, 1963, initiation ceremonies were conducted for Jones in the law offices of C. C. Divine, after which Jones was given a membership card identifying him as a 33rd Degree Mason. The card was signed by appellant. The next day, August 14, 1963, Jones gave a check for $111.25, payable to National Grand Lodge, in payment on the initiation. Jones further testified that when he attempted to gain admittance into other Masonic Lodges he found that he was not welcome at these lodges and that he then realized he had not been made a Mason and attempted to get his money back, but his request was refused.

Five other witnesses testified that they had been induced to join the Golden Eagle Lodge #1 under circumstances virtually identical to the transaction involving the witness Jones.

The following testimony of A1 Phipps is found in the narrative statement of facts:

“ * * * Neal Hilliard had formed a Golden Eagle Lodge and he got me interested in selling memberships in the Golden Eagle Lodge. He told me to carry a Bible and those people that would be interested, to have them swear on the Bible that they would not tell anyone of their other friends that they were going through the obligations and ceremonies of joining this Golden Eagle Lodge. I never told any of these people the location of Neal Hilliard’s lodge over on Andrews Street and Neal Hilliard told me not to mention this because the- Golden Eagle Lodge was to be a lodge of all white people and the lodge over on Andrews Street, the National King Solomon Lodge at 711 Andrews, was mostly a Negro lodge. I went to a meeting in which C. C. Divine, Roy Dean Berger, Neal Hilliard, William Byrd, Mary Alice Zaid and Max Allen Russell and Alfred Divine were present. * * * The money that was to come in through dues and initiation— it was agreed that it would be split up as follows: the salesmen would get twenty per cent of any membership sold, five per cent would come off of the top to go to the offices of C. C. Divine, and Neal Hilliard was to get the remaining portion. Neal Hilliard was in charge of this meeting — so far as I am concerned, Neal Hil-liard is the Lodge.
«* * *
“When I would get the initial $85 such as the $85 I received from O. C. Jones, I would take it down immediately and get a cashier’s check in exchange for the check given me by the prospective new member and I would take this money to Neal Hilliard. I did this in O. C. Jones’ case. I also took the $111.25 check given to me by O. C. Jones to Neal Hilliard. When I got the money to Neal Hilliard, he would give me my commission immediately.

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

Related

Dunn v. State
733 S.W.2d 212 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Abdnor v. State
712 S.W.2d 136 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1986)
Ex Parte Contreras
586 S.W.2d 550 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1979)
Bradley v. State
564 S.W.2d 727 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Draper v. State
539 S.W.2d 61 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Cartwright v. State
527 S.W.2d 535 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Ex Parte Weeks v. State
521 S.W.2d 858 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Dart v. State
515 S.W.2d 119 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Rummel v. State
509 S.W.2d 630 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1974)
Imperial Insurance Company v. Ellington
498 S.W.2d 368 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1973)
Fisher v. State
487 S.W.2d 335 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Kinder v. State
477 S.W.2d 584 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1971)
Nielson v. State
437 S.W.2d 862 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
401 S.W.2d 814, 1966 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hilliard-v-state-texcrimapp-1966.