Find Laws Find Lawyers Free Legal Forms USA State Laws
Laws-info.com » Cases » Texas » 7th District Court of Appeals » 2006 » David Smith v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County
David Smith v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County
State: Texas
Court: Texas Northern District Court
Docket No: 07-06-00048-CR
Case Date: 12/29/2006
Plaintiff: David Smith
Defendant: The State of Texas--Appeal from 137th District Court of Lubbock County
Preview:NO. 07-06-0048-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL B DECEMBER 29, 2006 ______________________________ DAVID l. SMITH, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ FROM THE 137TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY; NO. 2004-407,438; HON. CECIL G. PURYEAR, PRESIDING _______________________________ Opinion _______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant, David I. Smith, appeals his conviction for possessing, with intent to deliver, a controlled substance (cocaine) in a drug free zone. His two issues involve the legal sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction and the trial court's admission of an extraneous offense. We affirm the judgment.

Issue 1 - Legal Sufficiency In his first issue, appellant complains of the legal sufficiency of the evidence by contending that the testimony of the only witness to the drug sale was not sufficiently corroborated. Furthermore, corroboration was required since the witness, Dorothy Wilbon, was a confidential informant of the police. We overrule the issue. According to statute, a defendant may not be convicted of the offense with which appellant was charged on the testimony of a person who is not a licensed peace officer or a special investigator but who is acting covertly on behalf of the police unless the testimony is corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant to the offense. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC . ANN . art. 38.141(a) (Vernon 2005). In assessing whether this

requirement was satisfied, we ignore the informant's testimony and instead examine the record to see if any other evidence tended to connect the accused to the offense. Dennis v. State, 151 S.W.3d 745, 749 (Tex. App.
Download 11672.pdf

Texas Law

Texas State Laws
    > Hazelwood Act
    > Texas Statutes
Texas State
    > Texas Cities
    > Texas State
    > Texas Zip Codes
Texas Tax
    > Texas Franchise Tax
    > Texas Sales Tax
    > Texas State Tax
Texas Court
    > Texas Public Records
Texas Labor Laws
    > Minimum Wage in Texas
Texas Agencies
    > Texas DMV
    > Texas Medicaid

Comments

Tips