Legal Opinion

Martinez v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided March 9, 1960No. 31577PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is passing as true a forged instrument; the punishment, two years.

In view of our disposition of this case, a recitation of the facts will not be deemed necessary other than to observe that appellant did not testify in his own behalf or place his reputation in issue.

In his closing argument, the prosecutor referred to appellant as a thug, a thief and a vagrant. There was nothing in the record to support such argument, and the bill so certifies. In fact, the record shows that appellant was employed chopping cotton at the time charged in the indictment. We…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. McGrew v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1940
  2. Clark v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1951
  3. Hilson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1924

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Everett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  2. Booth v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973
  3. Rooney v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1991
  4. Tanner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API