Spencer v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Spencer v. State

438 S.W.2d 109, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 859

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 5, 1969

Docket41874

StatusPublished

Cited by11 cases

This text of 438 S.W.2d 109 (Spencer 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

Spencer v. State, 438 S.W.2d 109, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 859 (Tex. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is robbery; the punishment, assessed by the jury, 25 years.

James Scott, a police cadet at the time of the trial, testified that on the day charged in the indictment he was employed as an assistant manager at a Seven-Eleven store and that appellant entered such store and robbed him at gun point of approximately $60.00 of the store’s money which he put in a paper bag in compliance with appellant’s demands. Appellant was arrested later in the day by Officer Sanders, and under the seat of the automobile where appellant was seated Sanders found a loaded pistol containing five bullets and in the back seat he found a paper sack containing money and eggs.

The sole question presented for review is the admission into evidence of the pistol and the bullets. The only objection was that such evidence was not material. It is axiomatic that an objection to the admission of evidence or testimony cannot be reviewed in the absence of any ground of objection. See cases collated at 13A Tex. Dig., Criminal Law, ^llZO^). We cannot bring ourselves to conclude that an objection to the introduction of evidence “as not being material to the case” was sufficiently explicit to point out to the court why appellant objected to the proffered evidence.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

DOUGLAS, J., not participating.

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

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is robbery; the punishment, assessed by the jury, 25 years.

James Scott, a police cadet at the time of the trial, testified that on the day charged in the indictment he was employed as an assistant manager at a Seven-Eleven store and that appellant entered such store and robbed him at gun point of approximately $60.00 of the store’s money which he put in a paper bag in compliance with appellant’s demands. Appellant was arrested later in the day by Officer Sanders, and under the seat of the automobile where appellant was seated Sanders found a loaded pistol containing five bullets and in the back seat he found a paper sack containing money and eggs.

The sole question presented for review is the admission into evidence of the pistol and the bullets. The only objection was that such evidence was not material. It is axiomatic that an objection to the admission of evidence or testimony cannot be reviewed in the absence of any ground of objection. See cases collated at 13A Tex. Dig., Criminal Law, ^llZO^). We cannot bring ourselves to conclude that an objection to the introduction of evidence “as not being material to the case” was sufficiently explicit to point out to the court why appellant objected to the proffered evidence.

Finding no reversible error, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

DOUGLAS, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

438 S.W.2d 109, 1969 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spencer-v-state-texcrimapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack