Home/Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas/Villalobos v. State

Villalobos v. State

568 S.W.2d 134, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1206
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 12, 1978
Docket54666
StatusPublished
Cited by24 cases

This text of 568 S.W.2d 134 (Villalobos 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
Villalobos v. State, 568 S.W.2d 134, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1206 (Tex. 1978).

Opinion

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for murder; punishment was assessed at twenty-five years.

Appellant requests reversal of his conviction for error committed when the trial court overruled his objection to jury argument made by the prosecutor in his opening argument at the conclusion of the guilt stage of the trial. The record reflects:

Prosecutor: “I don’t think that self defense is adequate for this case. I don’t believe, as you were charged, this defendant has the justification of self defense and I don’t think you ought to find it. I am going to ask you to find him guilty. I believe he is just as guilty as he can possibly be.
“[Defense counsel]: Your Honor, we object to the prosecutor interjecting his personal opinion to the defendant’s guilt.
“THE COURT: Overruled.”

In Baldwin v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 499 S.W.2d 7, the Court wrote:

“Though not briefed as a ground of error, we note that in argument the prosecutor stated, T think that he’s guilty.’ An objection that such a statement improperly allowed the prosecutor to state his own opinion was overruled. The objection should have been sustained. Such argument is outside the realm of proper summation.”

The argument in the instant case likewise was improper and the objection should have been sustained.

The State cites Sikes v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 500 S.W.2d 650, and Ramos v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 419 S.W.2d 359, and asserts the argument was based on the record. Although in its brief the State asserts that throughout his argument the prosecutor qualified his remarks with the words “I think the evidence shows,” the State does not refer this Court to where such qualifying remarks appear in the record, and our own examination of the record reveals no *135 such qualifying remarks in proximity to the argument quoted above.

Although appellant testified to shooting the deceased, no other witnesses observed the shooting, and appellant presented a case of self defense. The State’s case in opposition to the claim of self defense was circumstantial. In view of the issues at trial we are unable to say the improper argument was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

Related

Ybarra, Rodney v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004
Williams, Jr., Kenneth Ray v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Lillard v. State
994 S.W.2d 747 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Lookingbill v. State
855 S.W.2d 66 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)
Mock v. State
848 S.W.2d 215 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)
Orosco v. State
827 S.W.2d 575 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Jones v. State
843 S.W.2d 487 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1992)
Jackson v. State
726 S.W.2d 217 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Koffel v. State
710 S.W.2d 796 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1986)
Landry v. State
706 S.W.2d 105 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Thomas v. State
693 S.W.2d 7 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
McGee v. State
689 S.W.2d 915 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1985)
Brotherton v. State
666 S.W.2d 126 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1984)
Smith v. State
658 S.W.2d 685 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Davis v. State
642 S.W.2d 510 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1982)
Hendricks v. State
640 S.W.2d 932 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1982)
Johnson v. State
629 S.W.2d 99 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1982)
Johnson v. State
604 S.W.2d 128 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1980)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
568 S.W.2d 134, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/villalobos-v-state-texcrimapp-1978.