Parker v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Parker v. State

232 S.W. 497, 89 Tex. Crim. 555, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 557

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 15, 1921

DocketNo. 6336.

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 232 S.W. 497 (Parker 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

Parker v. State, 232 S.W. 497, 89 Tex. Crim. 555, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 557 (Tex. 1921).

Pincite

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the District Court of San Augustine County of manslaughter, and his punishment fixed at two years in the penitentiary.

In his argument to the jury the State’s attorney told them that appellant had asked for a suspended sentence, and that they should consider such fact as affecting his guilt or innocence. This was manifestly improper. No such argument can be justified. The law gives to one accused of crime the right of suspended sentence under the terms of the statute, and goes so far as to require the trial court, when the accused has no counsel, to inform him of his right to make application for suspended sentence, and to appoint counsel to prepare and present said application for the defendant. The argument in question was promptly excepted to, and the court asked to instruct the jury not to consider same, which request was refused. This was error. Tamaya v. State, 230 S. W. Rep., 146.

Appellant asked for a new trial because of newly discovered evidence, attaching the affidavits of a number of witnesses. There are also other matters complained of, but being of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed because of the errors mentioned, we omit further discussion. A reversal is ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

Appellant was convicted in the District Court of San Augustine County of manslaughter, and his punishment fixed at two years in the penitentiary.

In his argument to the jury the State’s attorney told them that appellant had asked for a suspended sentence, and that they should consider such fact as affecting his guilt or innocence. This was manifestly improper. No such argument can be justified. The law gives to one accused of crime the right of suspended sentence under the terms of the statute, and goes so far as to require the trial court, when the accused has no counsel, to inform him of his right to make application for suspended sentence, and to appoint counsel to prepare and present said application for the defendant. The argument in question was promptly excepted to, and the court asked to instruct the jury not to consider same, which request was refused. This was error. Tamaya v. State, 230 S. W. Rep., 146.

Appellant asked for a new trial because of newly discovered evidence, attaching the affidavits of a number of witnesses. There are also other matters complained of, but being of the opinion that the judgment should be reversed because of the errors mentioned, we omit further discussion. A reversal is ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

232 S.W. 497, 89 Tex. Crim. 555, 1921 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 557, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/parker-v-state-texcrimapp-1921.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack