<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META NAME="Generator" CONTENT="WordPerfect 9">
<TITLE></TITLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY TEXT="#000000" LINK="#0000ff" VLINK="#551a8b" ALINK="#ff0000" BGCOLOR="#c0c0c0">

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-size: 14pt"><STRONG><CENTER>TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN</STRONG></SPAN></CENTER>
</P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><CENTER>NO. 03-93-00647-CR</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>Troy Roberson, Appellant</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>v.</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER>The State of Texas, Appellee</CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times" STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY, 299TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT</CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times" STYLE="font-size: 11pt"><STRONG><CENTER>NO. 0934036, HONORABLE JON N. WISSER, JUDGE PRESIDING</STRONG></SPAN><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG></CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG><CENTER></CENTER>
</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times"><STRONG>PER CURIAM</STRONG></SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	A jury found appellant guilty of murder and assessed punishment at imprisonment
for life and a $10,000 fine.  Penal Code, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 399, sec. 1, § 19.02, 1973 Tex.
Gen. Laws 883, 913, <EM>amended by</EM> Act of May 28, 1973, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 426, art. 2, § 1,
1973 Tex. Gen. Laws 1122, 1123 (Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 19.02, since amended).  Appellant
shot and killed the deceased in a drug-related dispute.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	In his only point of error, appellant contends the district court erred by permitting
the State to adduce testimony that appellant's trial attorney had also been the attorney for a
witness.  The witness in question was Perry Williams, a friend of appellant who witnessed the
shooting and testified for the State during the guilt phase of trial.  In response to questions by the
prosecutor, Williams acknowledged that, since the shooting, he had been convicted and placed on
probation for possession of cocaine.  </SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Q: And who was your attorney in that matter?</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">A: Lee Richardson.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Q: This same Lee Richardson over here?</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">A: Yes.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Q: Was he your attorney during the same time that he's been Troy's attorney?</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">A: No.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Q: When was he -- how do you know?</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">A: He wasn't Troy's attorney then, he was mine.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">At this point, appellant objected to this questioning as irrelevant and an effort "to get at the
defendant through his lawyer."  The objection was overruled but the prosecutor went on to
another subject.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	Any error in this line of questioning was not preserved for two reasons.  First,
appellant did not object at the earliest opportunity.  <EM>Johnson v. State</EM>, 803 S.W.2d 272, 291 (Tex.
Crim. App. 1990).  Second, appellant waived any error that occurred at the guilt phase when he
testified at the punishment phase and admitted his guilt.  <EM>McGlothlin v. State</EM>, 896 S.W.2d 183,
187 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995).  The point of error is overruled.</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">	The judgment of conviction is affirmed.</SPAN></P>

<BR WP="BR1"><BR WP="BR2">
<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and B. A. Smith</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Affirmed</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Filed:    December 20, 1995</SPAN></P>

<P><SPAN STYLE="font-family: CG Times">Do Not Publish</SPAN></P>

</BODY>
</HTML>
