Kilpper v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Kilpper v. State

491 S.W.2d 117, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2324

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 7, 1973

Docket46514

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 491 S.W.2d 117 (Kilpper 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

Kilpper v. State, 491 S.W.2d 117, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2324 (Tex. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

DALLY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for the possession of marihuana; the punishment, three years imprisonment, probated.

The appellant’s motion to suppress evidence on the ground that the evidence was obtained by an unlawful search in violation of the appellant’s constitutional rights was heard by the court and was overruled.

The appellant then entered a plea of guilty with a written “stipulation” being made providing that he reserved the right to appeal from the trial court’s action overruling the motion to suppress evidence. The trial court recognized and approved this stipulation, stating at the time the plea of guilty was accepted “ . . . you are not waiving your objections which you have preserved as far as the court’s ruling on your motion to suppress and the motion to quash.” The court, under these conditions, erroneously permitted the appellant to enter a plea of guilty.

Under our holding in Killebrew v. State, 464 S.W.2d 838 (Tex.Cr.App.1971) and Chavarria v. State, 425 S.W.2d 822 (Tex. Cr.App.1968) an appellant may not enter a plea of guilty and reserve the right to appeal from an order overruling a motion to suppress evidence. The facts in the record in this case are distinguishable from those in Allen v. State, 474 S.W.2d 480 (Tex.Cr. App.1971).

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.

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

OPINION

DALLY, Commissioner.

The conviction is for the possession of marihuana; the punishment, three years imprisonment, probated.

The appellant’s motion to suppress evidence on the ground that the evidence was obtained by an unlawful search in violation of the appellant’s constitutional rights was heard by the court and was overruled.

The appellant then entered a plea of guilty with a written “stipulation” being made providing that he reserved the right to appeal from the trial court’s action overruling the motion to suppress evidence. The trial court recognized and approved this stipulation, stating at the time the plea of guilty was accepted “ . . . you are not waiving your objections which you have preserved as far as the court’s ruling on your motion to suppress and the motion to quash.” The court, under these conditions, erroneously permitted the appellant to enter a plea of guilty.

Under our holding in Killebrew v. State, 464 S.W.2d 838 (Tex.Cr.App.1971) and Chavarria v. State, 425 S.W.2d 822 (Tex. Cr.App.1968) an appellant may not enter a plea of guilty and reserve the right to appeal from an order overruling a motion to suppress evidence. The facts in the record in this case are distinguishable from those in Allen v. State, 474 S.W.2d 480 (Tex.Cr. App.1971).

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

491 S.W.2d 117, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2324, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kilpper-v-state-texcrimapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack