Campbell v. State

Buck Campbell, Alias Albert Campbell, v. the State

Campbell v. State, 56 S.W.2d 460 (Tex. Crim. App. 1933)

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided: January 18, 1933
Docket: No. 15547.
Judges: Hawkins
Citations: 56 S.W.2d 460122 Tex. Crim. 4941933 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 31

Cited by 6

Summary

The opinion states the case.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Hawkins

HAWKINS, Judge.

Conviction is for burglary, punishment being two years in the penitentiary.

No statement of facts is brought forward. By motion in arrest of judgment, sworn to by appellant, and also by amended motion for new trial, also sworn to by appellant, an attempt is made to challenge" the jury which tried the case as having been drawn under the “jury wheel” law of McLennan county, which was held unconstitutional in Smith v. State, 120 Texas Crim. Rep., 431 , 49 S. W. (2d) 739 , and Whatley v. State, 121 Texas Crim. Rep., 457 , 51 S. W. (2d) 1116 . Both motions raise an issue of fact, to establish which it became necessary for the court to hear evidence. Especially would this be true where,, as in the present case, the averments in the motions were denied under oath by the state. If any testimony was heard, it is not brought before us either by bill of exception or statement, of facts. In such case we must presume that the trial court, was correct in overruling the motion. Furthermore, no question in limine was raised regarding the jury, and we see no-reason why the general rule would not be applicable, which is. that it is too late after verdict to complain for the first time.of errors committed in impaneling or organizing the jury.. Branch’s Ann. Tex. P. C., sec. 524, and cases cited thereunder, among them being Ellington v. State, 63 Texas Crim. Rep., 427 ,. 140 S. W., 1101 ; Texas Jurisprudence, vol. 4, sec. 34; Gardena, v. State, 94 Texas Crim. Rep., 436 , 251 S. W., 225 .

The judgment is affirmed.

Affirmed„

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →

State Highest Courts6

Relies on it most ⓘ

Cockrell v. State117 S.W.2d 1105 (Tex. Crim. App. 1938)
Clay v. State505 S.W.2d 882 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974)
McCullough v. State425 S.W.2d 359 (Tex. Crim. App. 1968)
Singleton v. State346 S.W.2d 328 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961)
Root v. State334 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960)
Ramsour v. State308 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. Crim. App. 1957)

Most recent

Clay v. State505 S.W.2d 882 (Tex. Crim. App. 1974)
McCullough v. State425 S.W.2d 359 (Tex. Crim. App. 1968)
Singleton v. State346 S.W.2d 328 (Tex. Crim. App. 1961)
Root v. State334 S.W.2d 154 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960)
Ramsour v. State308 S.W.2d 56 (Tex. Crim. App. 1957)
Cockrell v. State117 S.W.2d 1105 (Tex. Crim. App. 1938)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 4

Depth	Case	Cited by
	Smith v. State, 49 S.W.2d 739 (Tex. Crim. App. 1932)	32
	Ellington v. State, 140 S.W. 1101 (Tex. Crim. App. 1911)	5
	Cardena v. State, 251 S.W. 225 (Tex. Crim. App. 1923)	3
	Whatley v. State, 51 S.W.2d 1116 (Tex. Crim. App. 1932)	1

`/`	Focus the search box
`j` `k`	Next / previous result
`Enter`	Open the selected result
`x`	Add / remove the selected result from the download list
`n` `p`	Next / previous search term in a case
`c`	Copy the citation of the current case
`+` `−`	Larger / smaller reading text
`?`	Show this list