From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Jackson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jun 11, 1958
314 S.W.2d 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)

Opinion


314 S.W.2d 97 (Tex.Crim.App. 1958) Thomas Foster JACKSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. No. 29925. Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. June 11, 1958

[166 Tex.Crim. 349] Landis & Gregory by Buddy W. Gregory, Houston, for appellant.

Dan Walton, Dist. Atty., Thomas D. White and Edward Michalek, Jr., Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The offense is driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated; the punishment, four days in jail and a fine of $75.

Officer Sims testified for the State, refreshing his memory from a writing he had in his hand.

Appellant's counsel requested that he be permitted to inspect the writing but the trial judge declined his request.

It is well settled that where a witness, while testifying, uses a writing to refresh his recollection, the defendant or his counsel is entitled to inspect the statement for cross-examination purposes. Green v. State, 53 Tex.Cr.R. 490, 110 S.W. 920, 22 L.R.A.,N.S., 706; Palacio v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 301 S.W.2d 166; McCormick & Ray, Texas Law of Evidence, 2d Ed. p. 449, Sec. 553; 44 Tex.Jur. p. 1140, Sec. 144; Branch's Ann.P.C. 2d Ed. 189, Sec. 182.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.


Summaries of

Jackson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jun 11, 1958
314 S.W.2d 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)
Case details for

Jackson v. State

Case Details

Full title:Thomas Foster JACKSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Jun 11, 1958

Citations

314 S.W.2d 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 1958)

Citing Cases

Sewell v. State

In his motion for rehearing appellant contends that we should reverse his conviction because the trial judge…

White v. State

Appellant invokes the 'use before the jury' rule and principally relies upon the language found in Sewell v.…