Martinez v. State

400 S.W.2d 764
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 30, 1966
DocketNo. 39477
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 400 S.W.2d 764 (Martinez 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
Martinez v. State, 400 S.W.2d 764 (Tex. 1966).

Opinion

WOODLEY, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, six years.

No statement of facts accompanies the record and there are no bills of exception.

The record reveals that the trial judge, after a hearing in the absence of the jury, entered an order finding that the statement of the defendant offered in evidence was voluntarily given after statutory warning and after he had been told that he had the right to consult an attorney, which he declined to do. Also, the court’s charge reflects that the issue of voluntariness was submitted to the jury.

In the absence of a statement of facts or bills of exception, the complaint relating to the admission of the confession is not before us for review.

The same is true as to appellant’s complaint which relates to argument of counsel for the state.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Gasery v. State
465 S.W.2d 377 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
400 S.W.2d 764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/martinez-v-state-texcrimapp-1966.