Court Opinion

ID: 9759659
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 00:24:08.285799+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:03.894797
License: Public Domain

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
MORRISON, Presiding Judge.
By supplemental motion for rehearing, the appellant asserts that the undisputed evidence shows that appellant was acting as agent for Officer Evans and therefore could not be guilty of making a sale to him. Reliance is had upon Durham v. State, 162 Texas Cr. Rep. 25, 280 S.W. 2d 787. In Durham, the undisputed evidence was that the accused purchased the narcotics from one Clarence and delivered the same to the officer with no advance in price and with no showing that she was in any way interested in behalf of Clarence. In the case at bar, we have no such showing. Here the appellant directed the parties to his address in South Dallas and there delivered the marijuana to the witness. There is no evidence that the appellant purchased the marijuana in South Dallas or that he delivered it to Evans at no advance in price.
Remaining convinced that we properly disposed of this cause originally, the appellant’s motion for rehearing is overruled.