Opinion

Kistler v. State

  • 591 S.W.2d 836
  • 1979 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1771
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed
Nov 28, 1979
Status
Published
Author
Dally
On the bench
Dally, Davis
Cited by
1 cases
Authority
More cited than 50.3%

The opinion

*837 OPINION

DALLY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a judgment in which the appellant was convicted of the offense of delivery of amphetamine, a controlled substance. The punishment, enhanced by a prior felony conviction, is imprisonment for seven years.

The appellant asserts that the trial court committed reversible error when it admitted in evidence over timely objection inadmissible hearsay evidence.

Over proper and timely objection the court admitted into evidence State’s Exhibit No. 4, which was an envelope bearing notations which were made by the officer submitting evidence to the crime laboratory.

The complained of evidence which was admitted follows:

“CASE NO. H-68341

REQUIRED INFORMATION FOR SUBMITTING EVIDENCE TO CRIME LABORTORY (sic) HOUSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

Suspect Kenneth Lee Kistler_

Print full name, sex, age and color

Offense SALE OF CONT. SUB Dat4 of Offense 1-13-75

Location 2725 Yale

Complaint State of Texas_

(Print full name, sex, age, and color)

Submitting Officer R. C. Garza Date submitted 1 — 13-75

Dept or Division Narcotics

Evidence Submitted 3-Yellow & Black Capsules

Analsis (sic) Required If cont. Sub.

RFNB 7:15 A.M. R, C. Garza_

14 June 76 (Wed.) (Officer’s Signature)

P.S. Police Officer (Title) •

2169_

(Badge No.)

Report introduced 208th 12 Oct. 76”

The admission of the above evidence over the appellant’s timely objection constitutes error. We need not restate the reasons which have been amply stated in the opinions of this Court and in the opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for four circuits. See Coulter v. State, 494 S.W.2d 876 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Rodriquez v. State, 494 S.W.2d 864 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Nelson v. State, 507 S.W.2d 565 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Battee v. State, 543 S.W.2d 91 (Tex.Cr.App.1976); Sisson v. State, 561 S.W.2d 197 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Carrier v. State, 565 S.W.2d 57 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); United States v. Brown, 451 F.2d 1231 (5th Cir. 1971); United States v. Adams, 385 F.2d (2nd Cir. 1967); Sanchez v. United States, 293 F.2d 260 (8th Cir. 1961); United States v. Ware, 247 F.2d 698 (7th Cir. 1957).

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.