Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). · Go Syfert
Search
Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 (Tex. Crim. App. 1970). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
G Cite
cited 3× by 3 distinct cases · …the appellant was sworn and testified at p. 388 ✓ Topic ↗
37 citation events (21 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Christopher Ray Weatherspoon v. State (texapp, 2015-09-28)
Treatment trajectory · 1970 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1970 1998 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 10 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Christopher Ray Weatherspoon v. State (2×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
Tex. App. · 2015 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the appellant was sworn and testified
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Walter Lee Scott, Jr. v. State (2×) also: Cited as authority (rule)
Tex. App. · 2015 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the appellant was sworn and testified
discussed Cited as authority (verbatim quote) Clifton Carl Lamar v. State
Tex. App. · 2015 · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence high
the appellant was sworn and testified
cited Cited as authority (rule) Emmett Asbury v. State
Tex. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Id., Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 6 (Tex. Crim.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Clifton Carl Lamar v. State
Tex. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387, 388 (Tex. Crim.
discussed Cited "see" Marion Raymon Crenshaw v. State
Tex. App. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 (Tex.Crim.App. 1970); Waage v. State, 456 S.W.2d 388 (Tex.Crim.App. 1970); Solo v. State, 456 S.W.2d 389 (Tex.Crim.App. 1970); Sexton v. State, 476 S.W.2d 320 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Knight v. State, 481 S.W.2d 143 (Tex.Crim.App. 1972); Potts v. State, 571 S.W.2d 180 (Tex.Crim.App. 1978).
cited Cited "see" Bridges v. State
Tex. Crim. App. · 1972 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sprinkle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 387 , and cases therein cited.
cited Cited "see" Ruiz v. State
Tex. Crim. App. · 1971 · signal: see · confidence high
See Sprinkle v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 387 ; Waage v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 388 ; Fierro v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 437 S.W.2d 833 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Dinnery v. State (2×)
Tex. Crim. App. · 1980 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Vasquez v. State, 477 S.W.2d 629 [Tex.Cr.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Sexton v. State
Tex. Crim. App. · 1972 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Sprinkle v. State, 456 S.W.2d 387 (Tex.Cr.App.1970); Vasquez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 477 S.W.2d 629 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Ella Dora SPRINKLE, Appellant,
v.
the STATE of Texas, Appellee
42991.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
Jul 8, 1970.
456 S.W.2d 387
Kenneth E. Blassingame, Dallas (on appeal only), for appellant., Henry Wade, Dist. Atty., Harry J. Schulz, ’ Jr., W. T. Westmoreland, Jr., Edgar A. Mason and John B. Tolle, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Jim D. Vollers, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.
Douglas.
Cited by 25 opinions  |  Published

OPINION

DOUGLAS, Judge.

The offense is. felony theft with the punishment assessed by the court at two years.

Appellant waived her right to trial by jury and entered a plea of guilty before the court. She waived the confrontation of witnesses. The stipulated testimony was that if Paul E. McManus, the alleged injured party, were present he would testify that he was manager of a business house on Gaston Avenue and that he saw the appellant take a suit of clothing of the value of $120.00 from a display rack and leave the store without paying for it and that the suit was taken without his consent.

Further, the testimony of J. L. Chadwick was to the effect that he was a member of the Dallas Police Department and that he stopped the appellant in an automobile on the day in question and saw a man’s suit which was identified by Paul McManus as the suit that had been stolen.

The appellant was sworn and testified that she was the person charged in the indictment and that she had waived her right to trial by jury. She testified that she heard the testimony read into the record by the prosecutor and that it was substantially true and correct.

The sole contention is that the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction.

The judicial admission by the appellant is sufficient to support the conviction under Article 1.15, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. Fierro v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 437 S.W.2d 833. See Ex parte Keener, 166 Tex.Cr.R. 326, 314 S.W.2d 93.

The judgment is affirmed.