Enos v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Enos v. State

959 S.W.2d 620, 1997 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 80, 1997 WL 632859

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedOctober 15, 1997

DocketNo. 1456-95

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 959 S.W.2d 620 (Enos 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

Enos v. State, 959 S.W.2d 620, 1997 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 80, 1997 WL 632859 (Tex. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION ON APPELLANTS PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled guilty to aggravated robbery. Tex. Penal Code § 29.08(a)(2). The jury assessed punishment at seventy-five years confinement. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Enos v. State, 859 S.W.2d 594 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1993). We reversed and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals. Enos v. State, 889 S.W.2d 308 (Tex.Cr.App.1994). On remand, the Court of Appeals found error but held the error was harmless. Enos v. State, 909 S.W.2d 293 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1995).

We granted appellant’s petition for discretionary review to determine whether all questions of harm are to be measured by the test set forth in Harris v. State, 790 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Cr.App.1989). After careful review of the appellate record, the Court of Appeals’ opinion, as well as the briefs before this Court, we conclude that our initial decision to grant review was improvident. Accordingly, Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed. Tex.R.App.Pro. 69.3.

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

OPINION ON APPELLANTS PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled guilty to aggravated robbery. Tex. Penal Code § 29.08(a)(2). The jury assessed punishment at seventy-five years confinement. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Enos v. State, 859 S.W.2d 594 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1993). We reversed and remanded the case to the Court of Appeals. Enos v. State, 889 S.W.2d 308 (Tex.Cr.App.1994). On remand, the Court of Appeals found error but held the error was harmless. Enos v. State, 909 S.W.2d 293 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1995).

We granted appellant’s petition for discretionary review to determine whether all questions of harm are to be measured by the test set forth in Harris v. State, 790 S.W.2d 568 (Tex.Cr.App.1989). After careful review of the appellate record, the Court of Appeals’ opinion, as well as the briefs before this Court, we conclude that our initial decision to grant review was improvident. Accordingly, Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed. Tex.R.App.Pro. 69.3.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

959 S.W.2d 620, 1997 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 80, 1997 WL 632859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/enos-v-state-texcrimapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack