*1
699
is well settled. Costello v.
Ground of error fifteen contends
the indictment
States,
that reversible error was committed when
76 S.Ct.
United
350 U.S.
State,
court
refused to allow
(1956); Forbes v.
513
probated probation sentence. The had ex error have grounds of appellant’s All of pired. are overruled. carefully considered and been
It is well settled in Texas a convic- af- the trial court are judgments The resulting probated tion in a sentence which firmed. expired may
has not impeach be used to
credibility of a witness. Tex.Code Crim.
Proc.Ann. art. provides 38.29 so Trippell
cases so hold. v. 535 S.W.2d (Tex.Cr.App.1976);
178 Redman v.
533 29 (Tex.Cr.App.1976). Appel- recognizes argues
lant those authorities but Alaska, the decision in v. Davis 415 U.S. S.Ct. 39 L.Ed.2d HAMMETT, Appellant, William Jack (1974), requires otherwise. We do not agree. Davis v. inquiry Alaska allowed an Texas, Appellee. The prior juvenile into a witness’s STATE probation though even prohibited Alaskan law such No. 58453. an inquiry. But Davis decision Texas, Appeals Court of Criminal upon based the fact that prior the witness’s En Banc. juvenile experiences prove tended to bias on part of the witness and that his testimo- 28, 1979. Feb. ny by experiences. was colored his past 11, 1979. Rehearing April Denied juvenile record there was admissible reasons, special for those merely not as a which, nature,
criminal record by very its
impeached the witness’s credibility. Appel-
lant contends that the same situation was
present because, here since the witnеss bar, subject police
owned a he was more attorney pressure cooperate district testify they as wanted. But the an-
swer argument to that is that fully
allowed to possi- show those facts as a
ble basis for the alleged witness’s bias. receiving concealing
conviction for sto- goods
len rele- necessary was neither nor purpose
vant for such a therefore does
not come within the exception created
Davis v. Alaska.
The final of error contends been indictment should have
quashed upon not suf because was based
ficient evidence. That such a contention is grounds validity attacking
701
OPINION ON MOTION STATE’S FOR REHEARING DAVIS, Judge. TOM G. prior opinions
Our are withdrawn following opinion is substituted. for the Appeal is taken from a conviction Penal offense of murder. V.T.C.A. Code, 19.03(a)(2). returned jury Sec. issue special finding an affirmative to each 37.071(d), submitted under V.A.C. Article C.P., accordingly was as- punishment death. sessed at Greer, Raymond Mrs. the widow *4 deceased, evening of testified that on 14, 1976, her returned October husband After Houston. their home Clute from TV and watching evening meal she was heard reading newspaper. he was She slamming something a door a sound like son, Ray- thought it was her husband’s mond, Jr., noticed that returning. She then She approximately time was 8:20. said, get up, They heard two voices. “Get chair, up,” over goddamn get up out of was hold- again. One of the men and over up and ing gun. She started to stand floor She by thrown to the her husband. say after immediately heard someone billfold, is his bill- shooting, where “Get “Let’s say, fold?” then heard someone She Let’s on, go. get of here. Come let’s out get out of here.” hus- She also testified and her that she concealed band had a safe in home their shooting she below a floor tile. After the broken. that the tile had been discovеred alive and thought her husband was still She identified help. positively for She called her who shot appellant as the man husband. offense Pryor,
Arthur of the the time Depart- investigator for the Police an Clute Bass, Jr., Tar- Freeport, H. Robert Sam ment, was called testified he rant, Houston, Irvin, Alvin, ap- Don for R. mur- possible investigate Greer home to pellant. he investigation, course der. In the of his spent bullets and found several .45 caliber Bass, W. Ogden Doyle Atty. Dist. caliber a .22 casings. shell He also located for Neighbours, Angleton, Asst. Atty., Dist. nu- witness fragment. Through this bullet the State. photographs merous the scene evidence. also into crime were introduced Carl Sherlock testified that his former trial the undeleted confession was admitted nephew, wife’s Curtis McGuffey, sold him jury. before the pistol .45 caliber in 1976. After $50.00 Janette testified for the defense Sherlock ex-wife, a conversation with his Janette acquainted Ray- that she had been Sherlock, had,” about some “difficulties she intimat- during mond Greer his lifetime and he called Officer J. L. Nicholson and turned type that he had involved in some ed been pistol over to him. ad- smuggling. of cocaine or narcotics She J. L. Nicholson of the Houston Police she had been arrested and mitted Department testified that early 1977 he charged with the instant of- in connection had a conversation with Carl Sherlock and grand by fense but had been “no-billed” that as a result of this cоnversation a .45 jury. during She the time she testified that pistol caliber turned over to him jail in connection with this held Evans, Sherlock. Jay formerly a detective miscarriage. offense she suffered a She with the Office, Harris County Sheriff’s , testified that was the father during testified that January, he was baby. testify did not participating in the investigation of the kill- guilt- and offered no other evidence at the ing of Raymond County. Greer in Brazoria stage innocence of the trial. January On he received .45 cali- trial, punishment phase At the pistol ber from Nicholson and turned over Har- Tywater, Richard a detective with the to the Houston “Firearms Ballistics Sec- Department, testified County ris Sheriff’s tion.” *5 surrounding as the circumstances Dr. Joseph Jachimczyk, Chief Medical Ex- ap- by second written statement made the aminer Houston, for Harris County and tes- appel- in which pellant custody while in his tified that autopsy performed an on the crimes. lant confessed to this and other body of Raymond Greer on October confession, This State’s Exhibit gunshot Six wounds were found and then Ex- admitted into evidence. State’s one bullet was recovered body. from the 17, omitting warnings hibit the and formal He determined the cause of death to be parts, appendix. is also set out in the multiple gunshot chest, wounds to the abdo- Henry, professor Dr. an Bill W. associate men, back, right upper extremity, and but- psychiatry University at the of Texas tocks. Galveston, Schоol of Medicine in testified Anderson, C. E. expert ballistics diagnosed that he as an anti- appellant the the Department, Houston Police testified no personality type, social for which there is that the bullet body recovered from Greer’s cure or acknowledged treatment. and the bullets found in the Greer home then introduced evidence of State were all fired from the .45 caliber automat- of a habitation prior burglary conviction for ic which Nicholson recovered from Sherlock. of 1975. County in Denton in December Pryor Arthur was re-called and testified evidence of a The State also introduced outside the presence of the jury as to the with- driving conviction for a motor vehicle taking circumstances of the appellant’s breaking permission out the owner’s written confession. hearing After addition- entering motor vehicle in 1966 and al evidence appellant from the and con- of a conviction for the offense of evidence sidering previously evidence offered at a presented burglary appellant in 1969. The pre-trial motion to suppress hearing, the punishment phase no at the of the evidence trial court the found confession admissible. trial. Appellant’s confession, omitting the warn- error, ings appellant In portions, ground and formal his first is set out in the per- appendix. the trial court erred in originally Whеn introduced contends be- jurors fore the jury guilt-innocence mitting prosecutor the the to inform stage of trial, the certain of the effect during extraneous matters were voir dire examination special deleted. At punishment phase the of the of their no answers to the yes or 37.071, only issues submitted under Art. V.A.C. trial court the will be for review C.P., punishment the phase at trial. [Emphasis of the abuse that discretion.” supplied.]
The record
reflects
after the sixth
juror was
selected the
filed a mo-
ease, we find that
In the instant
tion in limine
the
requesting
court to direct
question
the
prosecutor
of whether the
prosecutor
the
not to inform
prospective
defendant, as in
this case or
for the
counsel
jurors of the
of their
no an-
yes
effect
State, supra,
Burns v.
should be allowed to
to the
special
swers
issues. The motion
explicitly
prospective jurors
ef
tell the
granted
limine
overruled and the court
fects
special
that their answers
issues
objection.
a running
submitted under Art. 37.071 is addressed to
(Tex.Cr.App.),
In Burns v.
393 (Tex.Cr.App.1976)],
noting
while
permitting
imply to the
prosecutor
“to
jury
know the
their
would
effect of
jurors
that the
during voir dire examination
answers to
Ar-
questions submitted under
knowingly’
terms
‘intentionally
37.071, supra,
ticle
it
was stated:
” Although
‘chance’ or
some
‘possibility.’
require
jury]
‘new statutes’
‘them [the
obscure,
appears
appellant’s
what
be
only
questions
judge
to answer
while the
when
prosecutor erred
contention that
assesses the
such
*6
punishment based on
to
attempting
explain
prospective
the
answers.’
“proba
term
jurors what he understood the
duty
it is
of the
to answer
jury
“Since
the
special issue
bility” to mean in the second
factual
the
inquiries
duty
the
of
describing
37.071. In
under Art.
submitted
court to
on these
punishment
assess
based
on a
“probability,”
prosecutor
the
the term
answers, we
court
find no error in the
“chance”
used
term
number of occasions
the
disallowing
panel
to tell
jury
counsel
the
only
us
Appellant refers
“possibility.”
or
the effect of
‘yes’
their
‘no’ answers.”
without
of
line
pages
a series
numbers
[Emphasis supplied.]
further elaboration.
State,
(Tex.Cr.App.1977),
In Battie v.
705
voir dire. The record further
filing
reflects that
appellant
Prior to
the motion in
at the conclusion of the
appel
voir dire the
requested
appointment
which he
of a
lant had four remaining peremptory chal
his choice at 11:00 a. m. on
psychologist of
lenges and the State had ten. There
no
is
14, 1977,
following
October
events had
showing
objectionable
that an
juror sat on
transpired which we deem relevant to
the jury.
appellant
had sufficient re
resolution of the issue before us.
maining peremptory challenges to have re
19, 1977,
mo-
April
appellant
On
filed his
moved
juror
each
he
complains
now
of who
hospital
a mental
tion for commitment to
panel.
State,
sat on the
Payton
See
v.
572
motion,
testing.
In such
de-
psychiatric
S.W.2d 677 (Tex.Cr.App.1978). No error is
fense counsel avers that he has reason to
Appellant’s
shown.
ground
second
of error
is afflicted with a
appellant
believe that
is overruled.
may
form
mental disorder that
have
appellant
next contends that
destroyed
wrong-
ability
perceive
the trial court erred in allowing psychia
fulness of his conduct and that
trist who was appointed to examine the
“appears
present
to be in a state at the
time
respect
to his competency to
prevents
being
him from
able to effec-
stand trial
to testify at
punishment
tively
undersigned attorney
assist the
phase of the trial.
the same
preparing any effective defense.”
error, appellant
complains
also
that he was
motion,
appellant’s
Pursuant to
the rec-
appointment
denied the
psychologist
of a
ord reflects that an order was entered
his own choosing
testify
as a defense
20, 1977,
Dr.
April
appointing
court on
witness.
psy-
W. Henry,
professor
B.
an associate
In Gholson v.
(Tex.Cr.App.1976),
ting certainly he processes, personality conducts himself with rather a but structure expressions and demeanors consistent which in type.” would be termed antisocial with a personality opinion When he an as behavior disorder asked whether had primarily.” the probability appellant to commit- future, ting criminal violence in the acts of report 26, 1977, In his April Henry on Dr. Dr. Henry stated: states, concluding after appellant that was “The or personality label attached to the competent trial, to stand that: character structure based on the histo- history “The would suggest that William of a ry given such activities in individual. person Jack is a who pos- Hammett has Most person suffering of frequently the behavioral, personality, sessed and chаr- an personality antisocial continues aeterological attributes which re- have demonstrate behaviors in future those sulted in repeated antisocial behavior past. which have been true in the He past eighteen over the years. There is a since described me antisocial behaviors suggestion that on in 1971 one occasion age eleven, description has been and the he quite depressed diag- became and was of to today. such which have led activities as having schizophrenic nosed a reaction some of the interview and following a lengthy period of con- solitary sug- would statements which are on file finement, including what is described gest there been continues has him as apparent sensory deprivation, be with similar kind preoccupations such however, apparently, which did then which behavior and threats made delusions, demonstrate any hallucina- my yes your ques- would make answer tions, psychosis, according or psy- tion.” report, chiatric which apparently respond- ed shortly 11, 1977, change to a of environment On August appears with some indigent medication.” court was determined appointed appellant’s and the retained court 26, 1977, began April Trial on along counsel at the trial with second first jury appellant guilty found mur- represent appellant. attorney to 3,May der on punishment 1977. The heаr- ing 4, began 1977, on May 1977, at 9:25 m. and 17, a. On filed a August the presentment of evidence concluded at motion trial which for continuance 1977, 1977, 12:05 p. day. 22, m. the re same On set for May been August the court an mis- be declaring quested appoint entered order that additional counsel recited, trial altogether which “it im- and trial granted ed. The motion was probable August that [they] agree could on a ver- reset for October 1977. On special dict attorney appointed as issue number three.” third represent appellant. supplemental transcript filed following great Court our number opinion original record reflects submission, it Henry by appellant motions on October shown Dr. were filed ap- 10, 1977, submitted a to the bill court for “5/4/77 none which related expert psychologist. testimony day Angle- pointment one-half of a psychiatrist day ton.” This dire was the first notice that this On same voir examination Court had sheet Henry may jury panel began. that Dr. have testi- The docket accept- fied punishment hearing juror first reflects was either the twelfth *8 Court, 14, trial. an Pursuant order of this ed or dired a. on October voir at 9:09 m. a. transcription Henry jury until 9:30 testimony of the of Dr. and the was recessed of stage (A verdict punishment Monday-10-17-77.” of the first trial m. “on has and trial guilty been forwarded to this Court. At such was reached on October trial, 20, 1977.) The Dr. in detail the tests was concluded on Henry described October appellant seeking he hаd and written motion of the administered that, of his own appointment his conclusion re- of psychologist “His mental status the district vealed no choice a file mark of indication of mental disease reflects clerk at 11:00 a. m. on gist October could make the examination or when While the motion reflects the notation “De- one testify could be available to at trial nied” signature of judge, the trial following the examination.
does not reflect when the motion was We recognize that there is a distinction
brought to the court’s attention or when the
appointment
legal
between the
of
counsel
court ruled on the matter.
represent
indigent
an
defendant and the
It is apparent from the
reports
written
of
appointment
psychiatrist
psycholo
Dr. Henry
testimony
and his
punish-
gist
to examine him-which stems from
ment hearing
of the first
May
trial on
professions.
distinct difference
in the
1977,that
Henry
Dr.
was a witness to mat- Nevertheless,
manipu
may
a defendant
beyond
ters
the scope of Arts. 46.02 or
rights
late his
to either to obstruct
46.03,
V.A.C.C.P. See Gholson v.
su-
justice.
Ro
orderly administration
See
pra. The record reflects that Dr. Henry’s
(Tex.Cr.
driguez v.
“did then and there tion into evidence and that knowingly part of custody cause death of an individu of the chain of each and of the court al, every exhibit is in the hands Greer, Raymond by shooting V. him ” . . . reporter period of time. gun; awith and that the said William no citation of au- Appellant’s brief contains Jack Hammett did then and there inten thority respect to this contention. tionally Ray cause the death of the said V. in the of mond Greer course commit examining In the record in instant ting attempting robbery;. . .." to commit case, No. we that Exhibit 1 is note State’s a .45 2 is cali-
diagram,
Exhibit No.
State’s
3-13, photo-
pistol;
ber
State’s Exhibits
In
quash
his motion to
and on
appeal,
15, spent
Exhibits 14 and
graphs; State’s
that
contends
the indictment was
casings;
bullet
Exhibits 16
and State’s
deficient
it did
because
not set forth the
of the accused.
17 are written statements
of
constituent elements
the offense of rob-
was made to
assuming
objection
Even
an
bery. The appellant specifically argues
grounds
now
each of the items on
that:
custody
of
is clear
a chain
urged, it
“There is no
or
allegation
committing
of
a well-
not
involved. As
question was
attempting to commit a theft.”
known
on
has observed:
text
evidence
State,
In
(Tex.Cr.App.1976),
v.
Smith
(Tex.Cr.App.),
denied,
cert.
434 U.S.
testimony given at
An examination of
(1977).
S.Ct.
709
-,
1058,
(1979);
Number 17 is a
99
In his Wishman that since pellant Appellant contends trial erred contends that the court in fingerprints personally take admitting into evidence Exhibits did State’s hearsay 19, 20, they were No. 21 punishment phase and 21 at the State’s Exhibit 21 Exhibit the trial. con and that both Exhibit Number 19 therefore State’s State’s Exhibits pen packets Tex State’s penitentiary packet sists of from the admitted. not have been Department containing a should as of Corrections (Tex.Cr.App. sentence, 500 S.W.2d judgment, commit Jones and order of fingerprint 1973), held that 11,965, ap No. this Court ment Cause wherein defendant’s compare expert properly driv could pellant was convicted of the offense of jail original “an from fingerprints taken ing motor vehicle without the owner’s 7H card” up made when person girl gave a named be set free if he friend would jail belief, incarcerated in the county compare statement. such a from these That facts, prints those confession the de- prove up other records to shows that the compulsion per- admissibility fendant was made with of other final convictions. get girl friend set free suasion so as to specifically Court noted that it was not jail from and from the murder necessary for the fingerprint expert to have was in dire need charge at a time when she prints made the known himself to authenti- miscarriage to her medical assistance due cate them. See also Tatum v. *12 jail.” while in S.W.2d 548 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Bullard v. State, 548 13 (Tex.Cr.App.1977). following events The record reflects the surrounding taking appellant’s of writ- the The sufficiently proved State that the confession, ten Exhibit Number State’s appellant was the same William Jack Ham- in appellant apparently The was arrested mett prior whose convictions were reflected 19, 1977. On County January Robertson in State’s Exhibits 19 Appellant’s and 20. 20, 1977, January person- law enforcement eighth ground of error is overruled. nel from Clute traveled to Robertson Coun- In ground error, his ninth appel of ty appellant attempted to interview lant contends that the trial court erred in rights by after he was his Lieu- advised of admitting 2, State’s Exhibit No. a .45 cali Argo tenant and had been taken before pistol, ber “complete because a chain of magistrate County. in Robertson Later custody had not proved.” been Appellant’s that was from day, appellant transferred grounded contention is on the fact that Carl County Robertson Jail to the Brazos Sherlock could not positively identify County evening Jail. Late in the of Janu- State’s Exhibit No. 2 being as the same 22, was from ary appellant transferred pistol he received from McGuffey Curtis in County. County the Brazos Jail to Brazoria 1976. When asked if he identify could again he was ad- Sunday, January On testified, State’s Exhibit No. Sherlock rights by magistrate vised in Brazo- of “Well, it looks like it but I have way Tuesday, January no of ria County. On knowing. I Imean never gun meeting place appellant did mark the took between the or nothing.” attorney. J. County L. Nicholson and the Brazoria district of the Hous friend, ton Department appellant’s girl Police day testified that next State’s Sherlock, Exhibit attorney, No. 2 was Janette and her Louis pistol he received Andrews, County from Carl met with the Brazoria Sherlock. He noted that at the request. time he district At attorney received the Andrеws’ weapon he scratched time, being this held without initials “J.L.N.” Sherlock weapon on the and that bond in con- charge on a of murder State’s Exhibit No. 2 contained this mark-: After nection with the instant offense. ing. The record also reflects that C. E. counsel, evaluating the case with her Anderson, a expert, ballistics testified that prosecutor in the amount agreed to set bond a bullet in found body deceased’s $2,500 on the condition that Sherlock matched a bullet fired from State’s Exhibit give a written statement to the authorities No. 2. facts, On the basis of these we find instant offense. The respect with that State’s Exhibit sufficiently No. was unclear as to whether a statement record is Appellant’s identified. ground ninth of er Although given by was ever Sherlock. ror is overruled. appar- testimony, there is a conflict in the error, his tenth appel Sherlock, the district ently request at the confession, lant contends that his written attorney agreed to allow her to meet State’s Exhibit No. given to Officer then appellant. and Andrews Sherlock Pryor, involuntary. appellant at the Brazoria met with the The appellant argues in his brief that his in a conference room. County Jail involuntary confession was as to her appellant as matter was advised Sherlock law because he has “was led to believe that his current condition since she medical now, ‘Well, boat
recently miscarriage. point. alsо make a those suffered She Yes, appellant being receipts? advised the she parts, any that A you got have Andrews, According to released on bond. A Q receipts? got so. some think You any there was no discussion that Well, “deal” go Yes, Qso. down I think would make a written state- them recess,’ bring ‘and noon sometime exchange in ment release on Sherlock’s in mind she leaves Okay, back.’ bond. bring them go get is them going to mind? your Doesn’t leave back. both Sherlock testified brings if It leaves in mind she my also ex- Sherlock’s release on bond put is her on the going he change them back appellant giving for the authori- ties a He asked participa- question. written confession as to his He asked the stand. robbery tion Raymond and murder on the stand her to do it. Put her prosecutor emphatically Greer. The them, denied bring don’t them ask about if she any agreement supported by such and was going well know darn she back. You Andrews, testimony of Louis Sherlock’s But, know, went she there you to. *13 attorney, present. who was Later that also brought she them back.” early the evening, afternoon and in the grounds on the appellant objected appellant gave a detailed written state- mat- testifying to prosecutor that the was ment, which was admitted as State’s Exhib- objection His was ters the record. outside undisputed it It is the Number 16. that his for mistrial overruled and motion proper warnings required formalities deniеd. 38.22, V.A.C.C.P., Art. by United following occurred The record reflects the fully complied States Constitution were Ray- of Mrs. during the cross-examination with. that Appellant’s only contention is mond Greer: voluntary the because it confession improperly by alleged induced “BY MR. SAM BASS counsel]: [defense respect “deal” with release on Sherlock’s de- they when were “Q you Were there evi- conflicting bond. On the basis of the livered? dence,' find, found, the trial court and we them. got receipts I “A Yes. supports the evidence the court’s find- de- were “Q they when you Were there ing freely vol- that the confession was livered? State, untarily given. v. 545 See Roberts office my I was “A I don’t recall if cf. (Tex.Cr.App.1977); S.W.2d 157 United de- they when yard out in the Cir., Robertson, (5th F.2d 1356 States v. 582 livered, some- but around there I was 1978)(en bane). ’ where. Appellant’s ground tenth of error is over- parts down “Q brought Who those ruled. there? error, ground In his eleventh name. “A I don’t recall the appellant contends that the trial court erred company? is name “Q What objection overruling argument name. “A I don’t recall prosecuting attorney of the when he al the man? is name of “Q What legedly testified to matters outside the rec name. I recall the “A don’t ord. you Can find is name? “Q What argu- following record reflects recess? you here at out when leave stage guilt-innocence ment occurred Of in the office. receipts are “A There of the trial: I can. course . . an- “MR. OGDEN . Now BASS: re- bring us “Q can find out around, You other trick I have seen old brought they when showing ceipts I if I the other side guess I was oh who kind, and parts, what the boat we are would do it too because adversar- them? you try ies. delivered get You a witness
713 Garcia (Tex.Cr.App.1976); 170 “A Yes. 541 S.W.2d State, (Tex.Cr.App.1976); 930 v. 537 S.W.2d “Q you re- Could do that at noon (Tex.Cr. 831 528 S.W.2d McElroy v. cess? App.1975). “A course I can that. Of do
“Q appreciate you I would it if would. . . ." of error Appellant’s ground twelfth
overruled.
following during
The record reflects the
and final
In his thirteenth
appellant’s
opening argument
error,
contends
guilt-innocence phase of the trial:
Penal Code
of the Texas
provisions
murder
“MR. TARRANT
Un-
[defense counsel]:
caption
because
are unconstitutional
system
going
der our
I am
to sit down
200,
relating
“An act
No.
House Bill
now
get
you any
and I don’t
to talk to
cir
certain
for murder under
punishment
more,
but before
sit down I would like
conditions,”
violative
cumstances and
say something
person
about one
35,
3,
Texas Constitution.
Art.
Sec.
testimony
that is the
of Mrs.
That
Greer.
previous
has been
contention
precise
This
delivery
supposed
that was
to come out
rejected
this Court. Smith
ly
night
dope.
there that
was with some
de
(Tex.Cr.App.1976), cert.
693
540 S.W.2d
you
anybody put
Did
hear
her on the
L.Ed.2d
nied,
97
51
430
S.Ct.
U.S.
witness stand to substantiate there was
270
(1977);
Burns v.
parts
boat
you
any
delivered? Did
see
denied,
434 U.S.
cert.
(Tex.Cr.App.),
evidence that
parts delivery
that boat
(1977).
by the was both a deduc State reasonable APPENDIX by
tion from the evidence and invited
State,
argument
appellant.
Antwine v.
# 16
EXHIBIT
STATE’S
572
(Tex.Cr.App.1978);
S.W.2d 541
Laws v.
since
James Richardson
“I have known
State,
(Tex.Cr.App.1976);
on the I said this a floor.’ screaming and of times. wife Greer’s “We drove to a on Plantation bar on the fell to the floor. corner from Greer’s. I don’t remember the bar, of the dinky, name but it was little and the back of Greer’s kicked “Richardson facing and was Plantation. and McGuffey he his knees. When chair real hard with got Richardson out into and went the bar to It that, up pistol. did came with a Greer drink some beer pool. and shoot I went thought at the time that was a revolver. I down to case Greer’s house. I gone .38, it was it was a but I heard later that approximately I fifteen minutes. walked It and white bone handles. a .22. had black opened gate around his house and in the from the He came and fired a shot at me up just fence and looked in and saw man and When distance feet. approximately five sitting a woman looking in a chair at televi- directly I fell back up, I saw the gun come sion. I on to the I heard the shot fired. couch. “I went back told them there were and shot first or Richard- don’t know if Greer house, people two and that two just son, only I one one them shot. heard them, cars Then I I gone. told had shot me and that thought shot. I he go get it, them.’ just ‘Let’s so him six feel I shot couldn’t seven times. I think I had bullets Raymond’s “We drove the bar beside from him six times gun, but I know I shot house, I don’t what the bar looked know feet. I six or seven distance of about building, I believe. I like. It was frame from the couch fired four of the shots go in the bar for a drink and told Curtiss slumped I down up. then stood Greer keys ignition, to leave the in the in the His face was the chair chair. back, when we came we would honk the I floor. after body was in the This was was, I time this but horn. don’t know what I five I had shot four or times. believe him it was after dark. standing I him while was shot three times given gun “I had Richardson the over him. convenience store. I told After Curtiss beer, said, go get a I ‘Let’s do it.’ I had “By time, laying this Greer .45 and Richardson had the .32 which I floor. I was going to choke him. I reached given had him. down grabbed his throat Richardson me. I gold reached for a chain that Greer original knock plan “Our was to on the dropped around his neck. I the .45 it, door and to tell answered whoever when I both went down to choke him with wrecker, car we needed a that our was in said, grabbed hands. Richardson me and ditch, we something. I knew that if man, ‘Come on I go.’ let’s started to reach door, get them we would open could gun for his and drew back then reached easier But when tried entry. have an We and drew again. And then I reached back door, went open it was unlocked. *16 got and was my gun. laying Greer flat on where Greer and in the door first. I knew floor, up, diagonally face the chair. to were, wife I had seen them his because His wife directly was on the floor behind was be- through the window when I there me. I thought shooting about her. I don’t their They sitting fore. were with back why know I It wasn’t I was didn’t. because big sitting He was us in a black chair. afraid of I anything. her or I felt like with arm right side of the chair get needed to out of there. I think don’t his wife. around her, she saw I was me. When last saw she “I ran in first and ran in front him laying was face down on the floor. She the left side him. Richardson direct- screaming moaning. why I and don’t know ly guns behind him. had on him. We both I didn’t her. shoot m_f_’ him, floor, I told ‘On the said, to- gone “His wife Greer ‘What “Richardson was and I started screamed. this, said, robbery, I man.’ ward the door halfway man?’ ‘This is a door. I went to the said, said, robbery, get ‘What?’ ‘It’s and crawl- He I turned and went back. She my had over hands and
“I blood all I a and washed real clothes. took shower moaning. and I didn’t ing toward Greer get changed my off. I good to the blood thought shooting I say anything to her. I that we had kill Cindy clothes. told but it off. I closed the door her blew nothing, she cry or but Greer. She didn’t in the through gate me and ran behind it. I told her not to happy wasn’t too about yard. front say about it. anything seat sitting in back “Richardson was bloody plastic in a put my “She clothes side, got when I passenger of the car on baggy type, and I bag, clear sandwich the car on the I into the front of got there. I with up bag think tied the end of the horn five six I honked the driver’s side. wire garbage type tier Then she took [sic]. into got He Curtis came out. times before bag went another the clothes in the and side. passenger’s on the the car in the front apartment complex and threw the clothes corner first and “I down to the drove dumpster. into a left at the took another took a left and then “This was home. before Jannette came I took end and It was a dead next street. Then she came home the two kids and right onto Plantation and then another left I called her into back and told room her toward and went left onto 288 Road. Then said, I tonight. had to kill a man She went on stop, not and Angleton. We did Ray- ‘What is his name?’ I her was told miles south About two toward Alvin. got upset mond Greer. real about it. She Alvin, thought left. I we took road She was worried me. I told her about up cut, we ended taking a short but I was how it everything happened, went and onto 288. Rosharon back down. change during “The hands guns didn’t Richardson “McGuffey Cindy and took this Mine the front seat. time. was under I home. believe Kim went with them. I I don’t Richardson’s was. know where got “I gun had from Richardson while Greer, that we had to kill told Curtis we still in the car. I took into them up we to shoot firing he had and had come put the house and water them some anyone about him. I told him not to tell them, put get sink to off fingerprints cool, I we and keep this. told them had in a under plastic bag, put them and them get busted. the bed Jannette’s bedroom. “I plotting right on both of them “Then came everybody spent back and then, going but I wasn’t to waste them night except for Richardson. next many people too had right then because morning I got up got guns we and and leaving apartment together. us seen told them I going to throw them away McGuffey were real sick. Richardson (everybody except Kay boys). and the two stopped went to Houston and We back place get Curtis said he knew of a good of 288 Texаco station at the intersection gun. gave rid of I him .45 I kept got gas worth of and 610. I five dollars the .32. got all out paid cash for it. We was real myself went to the bathroom. Richardson “I left highway drove on I up. got stopped bridge sick and to throw We back into almost to Porter. at a at a on the East gun river. threw the car went to Jannette’s house. side, side, or on the of the river. I Houston there. got there when we “Janette wasn’t *17 thirty yards threw it into the water about Richard- just There me and and Curtis wrapped gun from the bank. The was still Cindy girl and named Kim. son and another you plastic and can bag, I show had kids with Jannette. were She where I threw it. he was take her ex-husband home because were about something. We there and I apartment, drunk “I back went an a half before she still there. I people an hour or hour and the same were think over got night place at a got back. rid the car that EXHIBIT # 17 STATE’S Cavalcade, off of not too far from there HAM- “My full name is WILLIAM JACK robbery. pulled I pulled where I the armed male, years METT and I am a white it, original the tires off of but I left the My home age. My date of birth 6-7-47. plates on it. Antonie # 155 and I live address is 5500 heroin since last doing “I have been My phone there with Jeannette Sherlock. time a two March. At that I had about I presently number there is 686-1364. am day support- hundred dollar a habit. I was unemployed. burglaries and car thefts. I would ing by at a Friend “I met Curtis McGuffie get through rid of the stuff a fence. D. who lives Jimmy the name of Smith Louisiana, girls going “The back to Sunny side in June of the address on anybody any- and I told them that if said I Richardson about the met James Alton thing happened, about what had that me or same time. Kenny would Green take care of them. I planning wasting on McGuffey, began episode April “I this criminal crying told Janette about it. started She theft, burglary, which consisted car him, please and said that she had raised armed robbery, and with a murder in ended planning wasting don’t do it. I was also Bazoria I addict County. am a heroin [sic] Richardson, but he put was arrested and January, and between April of 1976 and County the Harris Rehab. I had asked him 1977 I approximately committed 130 bur- twenty about times if he got had rid of glaries approximately 30 cars. I stole the .45. He told me that he had thrown it robberies, ag- committed three armed one pond. in a finally, Then he told me that he gravated robbery one mur- and committed ex-husband, had sold it to Janette’s Red. habit, support my my der to herion [sic] night busted, “The got before Curtis I habit. up. real messed This was into the night and Curtis was on people THC. Some making “The reason I am this statement came in and told me that Janette was in for that if i everything is to clear because I feel Capital Murder, and that Red had Curtis’ cooperate go with me it would easier [sic] gun. I asked Curtis if he gun had sold the get pressure my and to off mind and to Red, said, and he ‘Yeah.’ When he said things make easier for me. that, I hit him in the eyе. going I started “In March I came from Deigo San my pistol (a Browning). 9 mm Some Houston, California to Texas and [sic] people me, grabbed telling and were me not Kenny moved in with Green who resided at to kill They got him. me out of there and living
we Havner. While Kenny left. Green, who is a herion began addict I [sic] “I house on Kenny went over to Green’s to use herion developed habit. Tuesday, [sic] he told me January In April 1976 I came dependent upon Depart- Rangers [sic] that the Texas and Police heroin and before, money sup- did not have the night ment there the hunt- had been port my ing Capital for me for Murder. habit which at this time I was shooting papers 3 to 4 a day, about $150.00 “Kenny my Green is married to first day pulled habit. I approximately 7 or 8 cousin, Judy Green. burglaries in April approximately and stole “I gone had over to their house to score working strickly 3 cars. At this time I was some heroin. He had about two or three by myself. As my habit became [sic] ounces of heroin and then asked me if I stronger, began May I to steal more. go wanted to to Hearn with him. He said 1976 I burglaries committed several girls living he knew these two who were several I many. car thefts. don’t know how with this trick who two hundred thou- I mostly County worked in North Harris buy dope you sand dollars and would all the part city. wanted. He took me there and left me. Northern I usual- spent night day.” ly gained and left the next entry through a back window or a *18 our car which was a parked
We hot car. the in the parked I We across street woods. mostly back door which ever was easier. buns, ware, meat, TV’s, stole color silver the in a We walked across street field and [sic], jewerly Anything and cash. of value everyone waited until of the customers had I that could sell to fence or trade for left. I went and to the window watched heroin. we receipts. him count his Then watched 17 years about him and woman and man “In June 1976 I met Curtis At McGuffie. years go girl old and a little about five old only up first set for people McGuffie me to into the the trailer house with brief case. burglaries their He set homes. several [sic] knocked, of the and up helped his friends for and me Curtis then went to door me dispose of a the lot of merchandise. After opened the door and Curtis asked the owner up setting burglaries several for he me said him if he remembered him. man asked me if I anyone help needed to Ime. no him he had run out and Curtis told that yes told him then I began and him and to of gas carry down and would he the street burglaries. commit We mostly out worked hidding get him to some. I was out [sic] County. helped North Harris He me off, site trailer with a sawed beside the [sic] steal several in the cars month of June. gun. hiding Ithica shot I came and out We country would ride around until gun up steps with the shot and ran we saw a house that looked like no one was I pulled pistol Curtis out his which believed always go home. would McGuffie I magnum was a 357 and hollared [sic] door and knock to see if anyone there. girl floor. The little be- everybody there, If park no one was we car would our get gan I told her to on the to scream and down the street or in the next block and Every- hurt her. going that I wasn’t to floor entry walk back to the house make and and McGuffie got kept on the floor one through the back. Then of us One would I gun taped while with the them covered go car, then back he would back into I so cut some tape their hands. I ran out way the drive and we load the I would car. feet, I with these. lamp cords and tied say meant to we pile up that would little I everyone except girl. up tied merchandise front ga- door money where was and asked the owner rage. pull We to burglaries continued these he my I his billfold and got said in billfold. steal up these cars on unitl [sic] cash in it. approximately there was $150.00 July. month day One we were out bur- him) I I the real (I asked him mean told glarizing, stopped and we at a cafe to eat told him that money, the brief case. Curtis lunch in Porter Texas. I believe name if he didn’t tell he Blow his head off would place was Bill’s Steak house and Bar was in the hall told us the brief case us. He BQ. building. It is a frame is a There and found I looked in the closet closet. trailer house where the and manager owner that kept telling them case. McGuffie brief right lives next door. While we were eat- body if going any he waste them to loud, ing, I made the statement out T won- no kept telling I them anything tried money night’. der what he does we get if did what they one would hurt We discussed this and decided come back I As to leave started asked. we started night July which he finger and ring off the owners take the money. watched to see what he did with his father and belonged told me all the left we After customers had watched beca- grandfather take it please don’t (i mean) we snuck to the window up [sic] I him to him and told sue it meant a lot [sic] manager money watched count understood, I had a lot I okay that put it in case we see a brief which could so with either part I things that would already money previous in it from the left, went back car and got we into our nights receipts. go We deceided [sic] $3800.00, approximately gotWe Houston. next night back the and robb him. On [sic] my money With my part McGuffie, $2100.00. July me and Curtis cost which a half of heroin bought ounce him. went back the Steak house rob *19 pointed and McGuffie
beside McGuffie worth bought probably I pistol at the while I got $400.00. $400.00 man into the car. clothing myself approximately for and We sped then off. McGuffie later told me clothing my girlfriend. $400.00 they that the man him had had told bought dope rest I days with. Four later I seen burglarizing us the house. McGuffie again was broke began, again. and to steal asked you they yes. him ‘are sure’ and said I also understand at about this time McGuf- He gound said that in that case hit the [sic] again fie was broke too. kept stealing I on pulled and pistol. out his Then hе took one up until August the middle of and at this of the got men’s car and came and me. We time went to County my Denton to kick went home. I can’t remember if it were a dope gone habit. I was approximately one day per- or two later that me and another month and then came back to Houston. son going that I am not to mention robbed Jimmy “I met again Richardson at this supermarket a I on Fulton St. abandoned time and pulling burglaries started with complex the car at an which apartment him, him. I also stole cars with for two the car that I had stolen on Frick Road. weeks I worked with Richardson and then kept working together Me and on McGuffie Vegas went to partying, Las then we went up until December when I met a man who (los to Angles California [sic]) and commit- keys had some real estate that which was ted robery armed Orange county. [sic] keys keep to lock boxes. These are used to We came back to Houston around the first keys estate real customers homes. pulled October and a few burgla- more The lock hung boxes on the front door ries together. containing the keys. homer owners time, “I again met McGuffie at this and keys open all lock on boxes all homes. me and him began and Richardson work gained entry This is how I to the homes. I together. On October 1976 we went to used these keys approximately on 50 bur- (Barozia Clute Texas a County) pull [sic] glaries. Then through I heаrd street talk robbery and committing killed man while that they hunting me for the murder this robbery. Richardson was arrested got in Clute I threw Texas. scared and days three later and sent to the rehab so me away keys Hwy on and began together. McGuffie to work We County “When I knew that the Harris pulled burglaries numerous up until No- getting Sheriff’s Office were close to catch- October, vember. At the end of about the ing me County, I left and went to Robinson 21st me and McGuffie were committing Hern Texas and arrested there [sic] burglaries on Frick Road. We left our car The next day Sheriff. Officers from parked and climbed over a fence. The car Clute Texas Har- Tywater and Officer from Elite, we used was a 75 or 76 Ford blue me, County ris came down and talked with vynil white top. I stole this car [sic] they which time served a murder warrant (I believe) from Charlie Hall Ford on Little from County. being Bazoria After [sic] York. Some construction men saw bur- us brought County, back from Bazoria I [sic] glarizing the house on Frick Road. When cooperate deceided with the Harris [sic] we came out of the addition we saw all the County officials. men gathering split around our car. We Argo Pryer “Officer of Clute and Officer up, began I walking away from the car and Texas I told them that I talked to me and began McGuffie walking toward the Acar. go County get my Harris and wanted pulled up man stopped beside me and January straight. Monday, business On car pulled gun out and told me to brought me to Argo Pryer 1977 Mr. walk back toward I walk- our car. As was custody into the County put Harris me ing back toward car I saw a man run Tywater of Det. and he took me before across the road and fall Then I in a ditch. I was magistrate, Judge Pacitte were coming saw a red or maroon to- [sic] Chevrolet Ty- my rights. advised of I told Detective high ward me at a speed. rate of The car robberies stopped burglaries water about the driving McGuffie was it. The man stopped that had told me to walk back and car offered to show him thefts and continuing
that will
constitute
threat
way
entry
unique
locations
that made
society
peculiarly
charge
face
*20
disposed
property.
jurisdiction
and
I
of the
I rode
consequences.
how
In this
ominous
Tywater
testimony
with Det.
and Detective Price and
opinion
the use of the
expert
pointed out the
in North Harris
locations
fre
those in
behavioral sciences has
I
County
and in
County
West Harris
prosecution,
to
quently been resorted
I
burglarized.
explained
had
also
I
how
consistently approved
and
has
this Court
gained entry
told
into the residence and
use,
sufficiency of the
basing
such
often
me,
implicated
them who was
in these
ver
support
death-producing
evidence to
burglaries.
copied
addresses
officers
See,
g.,
dict
e.
Franklin
on that evidence.
people.
I
spoke
and
with the
beleived
(5/24/78,
v.
v.
57,348);
State
[sic]
#
Chambers
burglaries
that there were
I com-
about 75
(1978);
first
I concur. PHILLIPS, JJ., join in
ROBERTS
this concurrence. *21 ELDRED, Appellant,
James Earl Texas, Appellee.
The STATE of
No. 54732. Texas,
Court of Appeals Criminal
Panel No. 1.
March