Thomas H. Young v. State ( 2005 )

NO. 07-04-0069-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

DECEMBER 7, 2005 ______________________________

THOMAS H. YOUNG,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 140^TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;

NO. 2003-404,581; HON. JIM B. DARNELL, PRESIDING _______________________________

Memorandum Opinion _______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Thomas H. Young appeals his convictions for possessing with intent to deliver and manufacturing a controlled substance (namely methamphetamine). His three issues concern the admission of evidence of an extraneous offense. We overrule the issues and affirm the judgment for the following reason.

The evidence in question involved discussion by an officer of an incident occurring after the offense for which appellant was tried. Furthermore, appellant objected to the testimony under Texas Rules of Evidence 401, 403 and 404. The objections were overruled, and the testimony continued. After the parties completed their examination of this particular officer, another was called by the State. This officer also testified about the same incident but without objection from the appellant. Moreover, the appellant had not requested or obtained a running objection when the incident was discussed by the first officer. Given these circumstances, the objection was waived. Leday v. State, 983 S.W.2d 713, 718 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice

Do not publish.

NO. 07-11-0098-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL C

MARCH 29, 2011

______________________________

IN RE HARVEY BRAMLETT, JR. AND JASON BLAKENEY, RELATORS

_________________________________

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ARISING FROM THE 108^TH DISTRICT COURT OF POTTER COUNTY

NO. 099017-00-E; HONORABLE DOUGLAS WOODBURN, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ..

MEMORANDUM OPINION

            By this original proceeding, Relators, Harvey Bramlett, Jr., and Jason Blakeney, both inmates proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis, sought to compel the Honorable Douglas Woodburn, Judge of the 108th District Court of Potter County, to recuse himself from their suit against the Texas Department of Criminal Justice and certain named employees of the Department and to rule on a myriad of motions pending in the trial court.  Now pending in this proceeding is Relators' Motion to Dismiss Mandamus[1] in which they represent that Judge Woodburn has issued a ruling in the underlying suit which they intend to appeal.

            Pursuant to Rule 42.1(a)(1) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, we grant Relators' request and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus.  Having dismissed this proceeding at the request of Relators, no motion for rehearing will be entertained.

                                                                                    Patrick A. Pirtle

                                                                                          Justice

---

[1]The motion to dismiss was filed on March 24, 2011. This Court invokes Rule 2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure to suspend the operation of Rule 10.3(a).