Erin Teague Wages v. The State of Texas--Appeal from 100th District Court of Childress County
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
NO. 07-07-0382-CR IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT AMARILLO PANEL C JULY 14, 2008 ______________________________ ERIN TEAGUE WAGES, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee _________________________________ FROM THE 100TH DISTRICT COURT OF CHILDRESS COUNTY; NO. 4833; HON. DAVID MCCOY, PRESIDING _______________________________ Memorandum Opinion _______________________________ Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ. Erin Teague Wages was convicted of possession of a controlled substance in a drug free zone. She challenges that conviction by contending, in two issues, that the trial court erred in denying her motion for continuance. We overrule the issues. The two motions in question were oral as opposed to written. Motions for the continuance of a criminal trial must be in writing and sworn to by a person having personal knowledge of the facts. TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC . ANN . art. 29.03 & 29.08 (Vernon 2006). When they are not, as here, it preserves nothing for review. Dewberry v. State, 4 S.W.3d 735, 755 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999); Dixon v. State, 64 S.W.3d 469, 472 (Tex. App. Amarillo 2001, pet. ref d). Nor did she complain, at trial, about purportedly being denied her constitutional right to compulsory process. Thus, that contention was also waived. Guevara v. State, 97 S.W.3d 579, 583 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). The judgment of the trial court is affirmed. Brian Quinn Chief Justice Do not publish. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
