Maldonado v. State

374 S.W.2d 443, 1964 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 816
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in Maldonado v. State. Read the opinion of the Court — 1965 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1166
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided January 22, 1964·No. No. 36156·Published

Opinion

McDonald, judge.

The conviction is for the offense of burglary with intent to commit theft; the punishment, two years confinement in the state penitentiary.

There is no statement of facts, nor has appellant filed a brief herein.

The verdict in the transcript shows that the jury assessed the penalty at two years in the penitentiary. The judgment in the transcript shows the verdict with the penalty assessed, but it also shows a suspension of the sentence. The sentence of the Court shows no suspension of the sentence; thus, apparently the wrong judgment form was used by the clerk.

In any event, in the absence of a recommendation from the jury, the trial court was without authority to suspend sentence on the judgment rendered on their verdict. Brown v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 652, 245 S.W.2d 497. See 13 Texas Digest, Criminal Law,

The judgment is reformed deleting therefrom the portion pertaining to the suspension of sentence, and as reformed, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Maldonado v. State, 374 S.W.2d 443, 1964 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 816 (Tex. 1964).

374 S.W.2d 443 (Maldonado v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. State
245 S.W.2d 497 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1951)