Munguia v. State

OPINION

DOUGLAS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for aggravated rape. The jury assessed punishment at twenty years.

In his first ground of error, Munguia contends that the trial court erred in admitting the identification testimony from an eyewitness and the complaining witness because of a suggestive identification procedure.

On November 11, 1976, Munguia entered a convenience store around 7:30 p. m. P_S_, the victim, and K-M-, the eyewitness, were both working at the store that night. Munguia asked to use the telephone but was refused. He stood next to the heater for a few minutes…