Toombs v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Toombs v. State

514 S.W.2d 259, 1974 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1906

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 9, 1974

Docket49199

StatusPublished

Cited by5 cases

This text of 514 S.W.2d 259 (Toombs 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

Toombs v. State, 514 S.W.2d 259, 1974 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1906 (Tex. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is felony theft, upon a plea of guilty; the punishment, assessed by the court, six (6) years.

Appellant’s second ground of error claims that the trial court failed to properly admonish him according to the provisions of Article 26.13, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. Specifically, he contends that the trial judge failed to inform him about the range of punishment.

An examination of the record reveals no admonition concerning the range of punishment. The admonition therefore does not meet the requirements of Art. 26.-13, supra, and is insufficient to support appellant’s guilty plea. Reed v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 500 S.W.2d 137.

The affidavit in the record, executed by appellant and approved by the trial court, acknowledging that appellant understood each specific element of Art. 26.13, supra, is insufficient to reflect compliance with Art. 26.13, supra. An affidavit of this nature may not be used as a substitute for the trial court’s personal admonishment.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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