Aguilar v. State
This text of 830 S.W.2d 612 (Aguilar v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
OPINION
A jury convicted appellant of robbery and assessed his punishment at confinement for fifty years after finding he was a habitual offender. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, finding that appellant had not made a prima facie showing that the State had exercised one of its peremptory strikes to exclude a member of the venire on the basis of race. Aguilar v. State, 826 S.W.2d 760 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth, 1992).
Appellant raises three grounds for review. After careful review we refuse appellant’s petition for review. However, as is true in every case in which discretionary review is refused, this refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). With this understanding, we refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
830 S.W.2d 612, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 136, 1992 WL 116083, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/aguilar-v-state-texcrimapp-1992.