Case ID: sw_268/html/0746-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "LATTIMORE, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

GREEN v. STATE.
    (No. 8668.)
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 14, 1925.
    Rehearing Denied Feb. 25, 1925.)
    1. Robbery <&wkey;24(3) — Conviction for robbery sustained, where supported by credible evidence.
    Conviction for robbery, where accused was piekéd up by officers shortly after crime and positively identified by victims, was .sustained, though evidence was sharply conflicting; question in such case being for jury.
    2. Criminal law &wkey;>l 171 (I) — Argument of district attorney held not to require reversal.
    Argument of district attorney, calling on jury to aid him in enforcing law, held not so objectionable as to call for reversal.
    Appeal from Criminal District Court, Harris County; C. W. Robinson, Judge.
    Cap Green was convicted of robbery, and he appeals.
    Affirmed.
    A. J.' Henderson, of Houston, for appellant.
    Tom Garrard, State’s Atty., and Grover C. Morris, Asst. State’s Atty., both of Austin, for the State.
   LATTIMORE, J.

Appellant was convicted in the criminal district court of Harris county of robbery, and his punishment fixed at five years in the penitentiary.

On the night in question a negro man and woman were walking along a street in Houston, when they were held up by a man with a handkerchief over his face, who at the point of a pistol relieved the woman of $9 and some cents and the man of two $1 bills. The robber then ran away. The man assaulted at once telephoned for officers, who i came in a few minutes and got a description of the robber and the direction he went. Some 12 or 15 blocks from the scene of the robbery, the officers found appellant, and, thinking him to answer the description, took him in custody. One of the officers testified that he asked appellant if he had recently been at the corner of certain streets, naming the place where the alleged robbery occurred, and that appellant made no reply, but seem-er in great confusion. He then asked him how he came to rob those people, and that appellant said it was the first time he ever <jid anything of that sort. He was positively identified by the man and the woman as their assailant. He presented as his defense a strong alibi, in support of which he produced the testimony of four or five people, who said they were with him at the hour of the robbery and that he was at a different place. He also testified to the same fact. He introduced some reputable witnesses, who testified that he had employment with an ice company in Houston and bore.a good reputation. It is the province of a jury to reconcile conflicts in evidence and pass on the credibility of the witnesses, and this court rarely disturbs a verdict which is supported by any credible testimony.

There is but one bill of exceptions in the record, which presents appellant’s complaint of the fact that the district attorney called on the jury to aid him in the enforcement of the law; We are not of opinion that the argument was so objectionable as to call for reversal.

Finding no error in the record, the judgment will be affirmed.