Diaz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Diaz v. State

796 S.W.2d 183, 1990 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 144

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedSeptember 19, 1990

DocketNos. 0068-89, 0069-89

StatusPublished

This text of 796 S.W.2d 183 (Diaz 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

Diaz v. State, 796 S.W.2d 183, 1990 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 144 (Tex. 1990).

Pincite

Opinions

DISSENT TO REFUSAL OF APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

CLINTON, Judge,

dissenting.

In rejecting appellant’s jeopardy claim the court of appeals found that “where, as in the instant case, the state’s charge of possession with intent to deliver and delivery required proof of two separate quantities of cocaine, there can be no double jeopardy issue because the statute allows prosecution for each instance.” Diaz v. State, 762 S.W.2d 701 (Tex.Cr.App.1988).

Without intimating what our own determination might be, I would grant the petition to consider this novel and significant question of jeopardy law.

Because the majority does not, I respectfully dissent.

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