Darden v. State

The appellant contends under his first ground of error that the confession admitted into evidence before the jury is “the fruit of an illegal detention,” 1 proscribed by V.T.C.A. Family Code, § 52.02(a). The majority disposes of his contention by saying nothing is presented for review because, among his many objections to the confession, such alleged illegal detention was not voiced.2 The reason is apparent from the briefs of the parties — even now neither has traced the odyssey of appellant beginning at the residence of his kin about midnight. *53I address the contention in the interest of…