Schreiber v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Schreiber v. State

480 S.W.2d 688, 1972 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1943

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 7, 1972

Docket45493

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 480 S.W.2d 688 (Schreiber 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

Schreiber v. State, 480 S.W.2d 688, 1972 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1943 (Tex. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is possession of heroin; the punishment, three (3) years.

The record reflects appellant waived his right to trial by jury and, after being duly admonished concerning the consequences of his action, entered a plea of guilty.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. He contends that the stipulations of evidence read into the record by the prosecutor are insufficient to support his conviction under Art. 1.15, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., since they were oral rather than written. 1 However, in addition to appellant’s consent to stipulate evidence in accordance with Art. 1.15, V.A.C.C.P., the record contains his written judicial confession sworn to before a Deputy District Clerk and approved by the judge and appellant’s attorney wherein he states that “on or about the 21st day of August, 1970, herein in Harris County, Texas, I did then and there unlawfully possess the narcotic drug, Heroin.”

'A written judicial confession which was introduced in evidence and which ad *689 mits the allegations in the indictment is sufficient to support a conviction on a plea of guilty. Edwards v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 473 (April 5, 1972); Milligan v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 552 (April 5, 1972); Barfield v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 431; and Drain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 465 S.W.2d 939.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

. Article 1.15, V.A.O.O.P., as amended, now permits oral stipulations.

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

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is possession of heroin; the punishment, three (3) years.

The record reflects appellant waived his right to trial by jury and, after being duly admonished concerning the consequences of his action, entered a plea of guilty.

Appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. He contends that the stipulations of evidence read into the record by the prosecutor are insufficient to support his conviction under Art. 1.15, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., since they were oral rather than written. 1 However, in addition to appellant’s consent to stipulate evidence in accordance with Art. 1.15, V.A.C.C.P., the record contains his written judicial confession sworn to before a Deputy District Clerk and approved by the judge and appellant’s attorney wherein he states that “on or about the 21st day of August, 1970, herein in Harris County, Texas, I did then and there unlawfully possess the narcotic drug, Heroin.”

'A written judicial confession which was introduced in evidence and which ad *689 mits the allegations in the indictment is sufficient to support a conviction on a plea of guilty. Edwards v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 473 (April 5, 1972); Milligan v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 552 (April 5, 1972); Barfield v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 467 S.W.2d 431; and Drain v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 465 S.W.2d 939.

The judgment is affirmed.

1

. Article 1.15, V.A.O.O.P., as amended, now permits oral stipulations.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

480 S.W.2d 688, 1972 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1943, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schreiber-v-state-texcrimapp-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack