Trevino v. State

343 S.W.2d 700, 171 Tex. Crim. 22, 1961 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 4315
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 1, 1961
DocketNo. 32,894
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 343 S.W.2d 700 (Trevino 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
Trevino v. State, 343 S.W.2d 700, 171 Tex. Crim. 22, 1961 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 4315 (Tex. 1961).

Opinion

WOODLEY, Presiding Judge

The appellant pleaded guilty before a jury to the charge of unlawful possession of marihuana, and the jury assessed his punishment at 10 years in the penitentiary.

The evidence shows that a cigar box and three fruit jars containing marihuana were found buried under the house in which appellant lived; that a trap door in a closet in the house was discovered beneath which were markings or trails leading to some of the marihuana.

Appellant confessed to possessing the marihuana.

The sole ground for reversal is that the trial court, in his charge to the jury, submitted the question of whether they would recommend that the sentence be probated.

Appellant filed an affidavit alleging that he had never been convicted of a felony and requested the court “to instruct the jury that in their discretion thay may recommend to the court that * * * defendant be placed on adult probation”.

There were no objection to the charge.

The trial judge was in error in submitting the question of probation to the jury for its recommendation, or, as appellant’s counsel puts it, it was “error for the trial judge to invite the jury to sit on the bench with him in deciding whether adult probation should be given a first offender”.

The error was, however, in the court’s charge to which there were no objections. Furthermore, the charge complained of was [24]*24given at the request of appellant. He is therefore in no position to complain. Art. 666 V.A.C.C.P. and cases cited under Note 23; Gage v. State, 159 Tex. Cr. R. 336, 263 S.W. 2d 553; Green v. State, 157 Tex. Cr. R. 546, 251 S.W. 2d 736.

The judgment is affirmed.

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

Related

Cadd v. State
587 S.W.2d 736 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
343 S.W.2d 700, 171 Tex. Crim. 22, 1961 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 4315, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trevino-v-state-texcrimapp-1961.