Roy v. State

319 S.W.2d 705, 167 Tex. Crim. 307, 1958 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 3556
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 12, 1958·No. 30100·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinions

WOODLEY, Judge.

[308] The offense is passing as true a forged instrument; the punishment, two years.

Appellant, represented by counsel, waived a jury and pleaded guilty, and on the trial after the state had offered evidence sufficient to warrant her conviction, testified and admitted her guilt.

The requirements of the statute relating to trials of non-capital felony cases before the court on a plea of guilty were fully complied with.

The sole complaint appears to be that the trial judge did not see fit to grant probation.

The state correctly contends that this was a matter which rested solely in the discretion of the trial judge. Escobar v. State, 162 Texas Cr. Rep. 115, 282 S.W. 2d 873.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Roy v. State, 319 S.W.2d 705, 167 Tex. Crim. 307, 1958 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 3556 (Tex. 1958).

319 S.W.2d 705 (Roy v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Murphy v. State
777 S.W.2d 44 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1989)
Quiroga v. State
478 S.W.2d 466 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Martin v. State
452 S.W.2d 481 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1970)
Redd v. State
438 S.W.2d 565 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1969)
M-D
9 I. & N. Dec. 172 (Board of Immigration Appeals, 1961)
Roy v. State
319 S.W.2d 705 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1958)