Ruiz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Ruiz v. State

464 S.W.2d 854, 1971 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1821

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 24, 1971

DocketNo. 43558

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 464 S.W.2d 854 (Ruiz 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

Ruiz v. State, 464 S.W.2d 854, 1971 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1821 (Tex. 1971).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This is an out of time appeal. The offense is fondling and the punishment was assessed by the court at ten years.

The record reflects that appellant took the stand and, after being duly admonished, made a voluntary judicial confession, pleading guilty to all elements of the alleged offense. We find sufficient evidence to support appellant’s plea of guilty and subsequent conviction. See Sprinkle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 387; Waage v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 388; Fierro v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 437 S.W.2d 833.

Appellant’s retained counsel assigns no error in his brief, and after carefully reviewing the record, we find nothing contained therein which we should consider as unassigned error under Art. 40.09, Sec. 13, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. During trial, appellant was adequately represented by retained counsel, and the record reflects that all procedural and constitutional requirements were fully complied with. Fierro v. State, supra.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment is affirmed.

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