From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rodriguez v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Nov 20, 1963
372 S.W.2d 541 (Tex. Crim. App. 1963)

Opinion

No. 35844.

November 20, 1963.

Appeal from County Court, Howard County, Lee Porter, J.

George T. Thomas, Big Spring, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.


The offense is the unlawful possession of a barbiturate; the punishment, confinement in jail for six months.

The evidence reflects that appellant possessed some capsules that were shown to contain a barbiturate.

Appellant testified that he saw two of his nieces at his mother's house playing with some red pills or capsules; that he carried them away from the house to keep them from the children; that he did not know what was in the capsules; that he had never taken a barbiturate.

Whether the defense was true or not was a question of fact to be decided by the jury. Appellant had the legal right to have his defensive theory submitted in an affirmative manner to the jury. Fawcett v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 127 S.W.2d 905.

The jury should have been instructed to the effect that if appellant came into possession of the capsules by having picked them up to keep his nieces from playing with them, and did not know they contained barbiturate that he should be acquitted.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.


Summaries of

Rodriguez v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Nov 20, 1963
372 S.W.2d 541 (Tex. Crim. App. 1963)
Case details for

Rodriguez v. State

Case Details

Full title:Albert RODRIGUEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Nov 20, 1963

Citations

372 S.W.2d 541 (Tex. Crim. App. 1963)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. State

However, I would so hold because the rule that an accused is entitled to an affirmative submission of every…

Woolridge v. State

       Since the accused is charged with the unlawful possession of a narcotic, the State must prove that he…