Roy v. State
This text of 319 S.W.2d 705 (Roy 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.
Opinions
[308]*308The 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
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
319 S.W.2d 705, 167 Tex. Crim. 307, 1958 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 3556, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/roy-v-state-texcrimapp-1958.