Blackwood v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Blackwood v. State

842 S.W.2d 695, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236, 1992 WL 367514

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided December 16, 1992·No. No. 941-91·Published

Opinion

[696] OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was surety on a bond for Ronald Lynn Nash. The trial court ordered the bond forfeited and entered a final judgment against appellant and others in the amount of $110,645. This judgment was affirmed. Nash v. State, 811 S.W.2d 698 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1991).

Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review of this opinion. The petition was granted October 16, 1991, to determine the effect of Matyastik v. State, 811 S.W.2d 102 (Tex.Cr.App.1991), on the validity of Article 22.16(a), V.A.C.C.P. Appellant has now filed a motion to dismiss his petition. We grant appellant’s motion.

Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.

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

[696] OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was surety on a bond for Ronald Lynn Nash. The trial court ordered the bond forfeited and entered a final judgment against appellant and others in the amount of $110,645. This judgment was affirmed. Nash v. State, 811 S.W.2d 698 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1991).

Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review of this opinion. The petition was granted October 16, 1991, to determine the effect of Matyastik v. State, 811 S.W.2d 102 (Tex.Cr.App.1991), on the validity of Article 22.16(a), V.A.C.C.P. Appellant has now filed a motion to dismiss his petition. We grant appellant’s motion.

Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.

Blackwood v. State, 842 S.W.2d 695, 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 236, 1992 WL 367514 (Tex. 1992).

Pincite

842 S.W.2d 695 (Blackwood v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related