Staton v. State

354 S.W.2d 582, 172 Tex. Crim. 128, 1962 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 902
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 28, 1962
Docket34350
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 354 S.W.2d 582 (Staton 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
Staton v. State, 354 S.W.2d 582, 172 Tex. Crim. 128, 1962 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 902 (Tex. 1962).

Opinion

McDonald, judge.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of unlawfully carrying a pistol and his punishment assessed at a fine of $200.

Trial was before the court without a jury.

Officer J. D. Liles testified that on the night in question, he stopped the appellant and issued him a ticket for speeding after he had observed appellant traveling at a “high rate of speed” and “exceeding” the speed limit on Telephone Road in the city of Houston. Officer Liles stated that appellant had been drinking, was belligerent and that he was carried to the police station by other officers. He further testified that he proceeded to search the appellant’s automobile and as a result *129 of the search found a pistol in the front seat which had one shell in the chamber and eight in the clip.

Appellant did not testify or offer any evidence in his behalf and no brief has been filed in his behalf.

Appellant’s sole contention in the trial court was that his arrest by Officer Liles for speeding was unlawful and that subsequent search of his automobile without a warrant was illegal.

The testimony of Officer Liles that he observed appellant violating a traffic law by speeding authorized his arrest without a warrant and the incidental search of his automobile. Art. 803 V.A.P.C., Scott v. State, 134 Texas Cr. Rep. 191, 114 S.W. 2d 565; Linthicum v. State, 134 Texas Cr. Rep. 608, 116 S.W. 2d 714; Minor v. State, 153 Texas Cr. Rep. 242, 219 S.W. 2d 467, and Douglas v. State, 167 Texas Cr. Rep. 82, 318 S.W. 2d 643.

Finding the evidence sufficient to support the conviction and no reversible error appearing, the judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Paul Mireles v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998
Garza v. State
704 S.W.2d 64 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Newhouse v. State
446 S.W.2d 697 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1969)
Lane v. State
424 S.W.2d 925 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
354 S.W.2d 582, 172 Tex. Crim. 128, 1962 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 902, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/staton-v-state-texcrimapp-1962.