Alexander v. State

617 S.W.2d 269, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1077
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 17, 1981
Docket60540
StatusPublished
Cited by19 cases

This text of 617 S.W.2d 269 (Alexander 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.

Bluebook
Alexander v. State, 617 S.W.2d 269, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1077 (Tex. 1981).

Opinion

OPINION

W. C. DAVIS, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for carrying an illegal club. See V.T.C.A. Penal Code, Sec. 46.02. 1 Punishment was assessed at a fine of $100.00.

The appellant contends that the evidence is insufficient to show that the appellant possessed a club. The appellant was convicted of having about his person 2 a 12-inch motorcycle chain that had a nylon, cord tied around the last link. Sec. 46.01(1) defines “club” as follows:

“(1) ‘Club’ means an instrument that is specially designed, made or adapted for the purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death by striking a person with the instrument, and includes but is not limited to the following:
(A) blackjack;
(B) nightstick;
(C) mace;
(D) tomahawk.”

The only testimony in the record which attempts to bring the chain within the definition of a “club” is as follows:

“Q. [Prosecutor]: Officer Brown, based upon your experience and your common knowledge, could this type of instrument be used to inflict serious bodily injury or death?
A. Yes, I believe it could.”

The fact that an object is capable of inflicting serious bodily injury or death alone does not bring the object within the definition of club set forth in Sec. 46.01, supra. As the practice commentary to Sec. 46.02, supra, notes:

“Instruments readily capable of inflicting serious injury but not specifically designed to do so, such as baseball bats and rolling pins, are excluded, if a person carrying one of them has intent to use them to inflict injury and his criminal design progresses far enough, however, he can be prosecuted for an attempted or completed assault...”

In this case, there is absolutely no evidence that the appellant carried about his person an instrument specifically designed, made or adapted for the purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death. We cannot infer from the presence of the nylon cord alone that this “adaption” was accomplished for the specific purpose of inflicting serious bodily injury or death. Compare with Tatom v. State, 555 S.W.2d 459 (Tex.Cr.App.1977). Accordingly, we find the evidence insufficient to sustain the conviction.

The judgment is reversed and remanded with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal.

1

. This section provides:

“(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly carries on or about his person a handgun, illegal knife, or club.
(b) Except as provided in Subsection (c), an offense under this section is a Class A. misdemeanor.
(c) An offense under this section is a felony of the third degree if it occurs on any premises licensed or issued a permit by this state for the sale or service of alcoholic beverages.”
2

. The chain was found in the car.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Vincent Spring v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013
State v. Ortiz
286 S.W.3d 514 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009)
State v. Rodney A. Ortiz
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2009
Danzi, Joshua Van v. State
101 S.W.3d 786 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)
Kenneth Dwain Adkins v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003
Chopps Jr., Alonzo v. State
79 S.W.3d 258 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2002)
Douglas James Carter v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998
Jackson v. State
865 S.W.2d 259 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993)
Rufo Atiogue Reyes v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1991
Coleman v. State
790 S.W.2d 369 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Heerema v. State
786 S.W.2d 532 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1990)
Meza v. State
652 S.W.2d 399 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Campbell v. State
633 S.W.2d 592 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1982)
Reisner v. State
627 S.W.2d 728 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
617 S.W.2d 269, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alexander-v-state-texcrimapp-1981.