Danford v. State

653 S.W.2d 436, 1983 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1122
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided July 13, 1983·No. No. 62855·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

OPINION

W.C. DAVIS, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of attempted murder. The court assessed punishment, [437]*437enhanced under V.T.C.A., Penal Code, § 12.42(d), at life imprisonment.

Appellant contends the evidence was fatally at variance with the indictment, which alleged that appellant attempted to kill the complainant by shooting him with a gun, in that the evidence showed only that appellant fired five shots at the complainant, who was unharmed.

In Windham v. State, 638 S.W.2d 486 (Tex.Cr.App.1982), the court, in ruling that a fatal variance existed between the allegation that a defendant shot at a complainant and proof that, though the defendant squeezed the trigger, his gun did not discharge, overruled Colman v. State, 542 S.W.2d 144 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), in which proof of shooting at had been held sufficient to sustain a conviction for attempt under an indictment alleging shooting.

We are bound by the holding of the en banc court in Windham,1 supra, and the judgment is therefore reversed with instructions to enter a judgment of acquittal.

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

Danford v. State, 653 S.W.2d 436, 1983 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1122 (Tex. 1983).

653 S.W.2d 436 (Danford v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Graves v. State
782 S.W.2d 5 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1989)
Yalch v. State
743 S.W.2d 231 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1988)