Court Opinion

ID: 9765598
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 04:09:14.966655+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:12.088938
License: Public Domain

MORRISON, Judge,
dissenting.
Bill of exception No. 5 reflects the failure of the trial court to grant a mistrial after the prosecuting attorney stated to the jury in his argument, “He (appellant) won’t go to work and try to make an honest living.” There is not a scintilla of evidence in the record to support this statement.
In Sparks v. State, 159 Texas Cr. Rep. 111, 261 S.W. 2d 571, we held that the prosecutor committed reversible error by stating that the appellant possessed marihuana for the purpose of selling it to school children where there was no evidence in the record to support such a statement.
In Kirk v. State, 159 Texas Cr. Rep. 124, 261 S.W. 2d 721, we held the prosecutor’s statement to the jury that he had helped appellant out of other trouble reversible error where there was no evidence in the record to support the same.
In the case at bar, the prosecutor injected new and harmful facts into the case which were highly prejudicial to the rights of appellant because he told the jury one of the most damaging pieces of evidence against any one charged with crime, as I see *496it; i.e., that the accused was a professional criminal and had no other occupation.
I respectfully dissent.