Stansbury v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Stansbury v. State

235 S.W.2d 156, 155 Tex. Crim. 344, 1951 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2275

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJanuary 3, 1951

DocketNo. 25077

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 235 S.W.2d 156 (Stansbury 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

Stansbury v. State, 235 S.W.2d 156, 155 Tex. Crim. 344, 1951 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2275 (Tex. 1951).

Pincite

Opinion

WOODLEY, Judge.

This appeal is from the judgment entered nunc pro tunc in Cause No. 14,509, correcting a judgment theretofore entered which, according to the court’s finding, contained an erroneous statement as to the punishment assessed by the trial judge upon appellant’s plea of guilty.

The facts concerning the judgment and its entry are set out in our Cause No. 24,874. See Ex Parte Stansbury, 155 Tex. Cr. R. 73; 231 S.W. 2d 431.

There is no statement of facts in this record, in the absence of which we must assume that the court’s findings regarding the entry and rendition of judgment are correct.

The court had the power and duty to order entry of the judgment that he had theretofore actually rendered in order to make the minutes of the court speak the truth. See Bennett v. State, 80 Tex. Cr. R. 652, 662, 194 S.W. 145.

There are no bills of exception, and the proceedings appear to be regular.

The judgment is affirmed.

Opinion approved by the court.

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