Bethune v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Bethune v. State

828 S.W.2d 14, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 101, 1992 WL 79212

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedApril 22, 1992

Docket1177-91

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 828 S.W.2d 14 (Bethune 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

Bethune v. State, 828 S.W.2d 14, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 101, 1992 WL 79212 (Tex. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S AND STATE’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault, with punishment being assessed by a jury at a $10,000 fine and confinement in the penitentiary for life. This conviction was affirmed. Bethune v. State, 821 S.W.2d 222 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1991). We granted discretionary review to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s decision to admit evidence pertaining to Appellant’s DNA “fingerprint.”

After having reviewed the record in this case, and in light of our recent decision in Kelly v. State, 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Cr.App.1992), in which we held that DNA evidence is admissible when relevant, we now find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals in this case is affirmed.

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

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S AND STATE’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault, with punishment being assessed by a jury at a $10,000 fine and confinement in the penitentiary for life. This conviction was affirmed. Bethune v. State, 821 S.W.2d 222 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1991). We granted discretionary review to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court’s decision to admit evidence pertaining to Appellant’s DNA “fingerprint.”

After having reviewed the record in this case, and in light of our recent decision in Kelly v. State, 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Cr.App.1992), in which we held that DNA evidence is admissible when relevant, we now find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. Accordingly, the judgment of the Court of Appeals in this case is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

828 S.W.2d 14, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 101, 1992 WL 79212, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bethune-v-state-texcrimapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack