David Comparini Luna v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 12, 2005
Docket10-03-00043-CR
StatusPublished

This text of David Comparini Luna v. State (David Comparini Luna v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
David Comparini Luna v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2005).

Opinion

IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS


No. 10-03-00043-CR

David Comparini Luna,

                                                                      Appellant

 v.

The State of Texas,

                                                                      Appellee


From the County Court at Law No 2

Johnson County, Texas

Trial Court # M200200046

DISSENTING Opinion


          The trial court’s question was standard operating procedure to make sure the defendant was knowingly and voluntarily waiving his Fifth Amendment right against self incrimination.  The admonishment was at the request of Luna’s counsel.  The trial court did not err in refusing to grant a mistrial.  I dissent.

                                                                   TOM GRAY

                                                                   Chief Justice

Dissenting opinion delivered and filed January 12, 2005

the due course of law provision of the Texas Constitution.  Because no timely, specific objection was made, this issue is not preserved for our review.  Id.  See also, Tex. R. App. P. 33.1. 

          Having no issue preserved for review, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Before Chief Justice Gray,

          Justice Vance, and

          Justice Reyna

(Justice Vance concurring with note)*

Affirmed

Opinion delivered and filed April 13, 2005

Do not publish

[CRPM]

          * “(Justice Vance concurs.  See Parker v. State, 119 S.W.3d 350, 357 (Tex. App.—Waco 2003, pet. ref’d).  This opinion simply concludes, without facts to justify the decision, that the issue was not preserved for review.  However, Rivera objected to the charge, and the State does not urge a lack of preservation.)”

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

Related

Parker v. State
119 S.W.3d 350 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2003)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
David Comparini Luna v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-comparini-luna-v-state-texapp-2005.