Federico Vallejo v. State
This text of Federico Vallejo v. State (Federico Vallejo 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.
Opinion
APPELLANT
APPELLEE
PER CURIAM
A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated kidnapping. Penal Code, 63d Leg., R.S., ch. 399, sec. 1, § 20.04, 1973 Tex. Gen. Laws 883, 915 (Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 20.04, since amended). The district court assessed punishment at imprisonment for ten years.
By a single point of error, appellant contends he is entitled to a new trial because the statement of facts does not contain the individual voir dire examination of the jury panel. Tex. R. App. P. 50(e). Appellant timely requested a statement of facts including the individual voir dire. Appellant has filed a motion to supplement the record supported by an affidavit from the court reporter stating that he has lost his notes from the voir dire examination and is therefore unable to complete the statement of facts. The State concedes that appellant has shown himself entitled to a new trial under Rule 50(e). See Culton v. State, 852 S.W.2d 512 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993).
The point of error is sustained. The judgment of conviction is reversed and the cause is remanded to the district court for a new trial.
Before Chief Justice Carroll, Justices Jones and Kidd
Reversed and Remanded
Filed: January 18, 1995
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Federico Vallejo v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/federico-vallejo-v-state-texapp-1995.