Noble v. State
This text of 336 S.W.2d 170 (Noble 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.
Opinion
Upon a plea of guilty before the court without a jury, appellant was convicted of the posseession of dolophine, a narcotic drug, and her punishment was assessed at three years.
It was stipulated by the appellant, and her counsel, and the state, that if officers B. L. Beaty and Tony Ingargiola of the narcotics bureau of the Dallas Police Department were present they would testify that they apprehended the appellant; and that on the way to the police staion in an automobile, Officer Ingargiola saw the appellant remove a bottle from the waist band of her dress and place it on the seat of the automobile, and that the bottle contained 47 tablets which he determined to be dolophine tablets; and that Dr. Morton Mason, a competent and qualified *16 chemist, if present, would testify that the results of an analysis he made of he 47 tablets showed that they contained dolophine, a narcotic drug.
Appellant testifying in her own behalf stated that she was guilty of the offense charged and that the stipulations were substantially true and correct.
The evidence is sufficient to support the conviction . Ex parte Keener, 166 Tex. Cr. Rep. 326, 314 S.W. 2d 93; King v. State, 167 Tex. Cr. Rep. 494, 320 S.W. 2d 842.
The judgment is affirmed.
Opinion approved by the Court.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
336 S.W.2d 170, 170 Tex. Crim. 15, 1960 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2068, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/noble-v-state-texcrimapp-1960.