From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Hicks v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Dec 17, 1958
318 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)

Opinion


318 S.W.2d 652 (Tex.Crim.App. 1958) Cornelious HICKS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 30235. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. December 17, 1958

Duke & Melton, Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Dallas, William F. Tucker and A. D. Jim Bowie, Asst. District Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is equipping a gaming house, as denounced by Article 629, Vernon's Ann.P.C.; the punishment, thirty days in jail.

[167 Tex.Crim. 116] No statement of facts accompanies the record.

The State, through her district attorney, confesses error, and we agree. Bill of exception No. 1 recites that the case was filed on February 24, called for trial on February 25, and that a motion for continuance which raised the question was overruled. Article 514, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., provides that an accused shall have two days in which to prepare for trial. See also Pugh v. State, 163 Tex.Cr.R. 258, 289 S.W.2d 929, and Buckley v. State, 108 Tex.Cr.R. 60, 298 S.W. 900, and the cases there cited. Bill of exception No. 2 recites that the affidavit for the search warrant was read to the jury over the objection that it was hearsay. In Hamilton v. State, 120 Tex.Cr.R. 154, 48 S.W.2d 1005, and the cases there cited, this Court has held that the admission of hearsay evidence of this nature calls for a reversal of the conviction.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.


Summaries of

Hicks v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Dec 17, 1958
318 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)
Case details for

Hicks v. State

Case Details

Full title:Cornelious HICKS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Dec 17, 1958

Citations

318 S.W.2d 652 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)

Citing Cases

Tucker v. State

The affidavit was clearly hearsay and, under the record presented, its admission in evidence was error and…

Pratt v. State

Moreover, while complainant repeated some of the facts contained within the affidavit, her testimony did not…