Ross v. State

HOWELL, Justice.

Claude Arch Ross, Jr. appeals from his conviction for burglary of a habitation. In two points of error he argues that the trial court erred 1) in admitting an in-court identification that had been tainted by an improper photographic show-up, and 2) in refusing to instruct the jury on accomplice testimony in regard to one of the witnesses against appellant. Finding no reversible error, we affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Appellant directs his first ground of error to the in-court identification of appellant made by accomplice witness Gilbert Cavillo. Cavillo testified that…