Francis v. State

922 S.W.2d 176, 1996 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 66, 1996 WL 252692

Opinions

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

McCORMICK, Presiding Judge.

Appellant was convicted of, among other things, burglary of a habitation and escape. The Court of Appeals affirmed appellant’s convictions. Francis v. State, 896 S.W.2d 406 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1995) (not yet reported). We granted appellant’s petition for discretionary review to address the Court of Appeals’ holding that a police officer’s initial seizure of appellant was “a classic example of a valid temporary investigative detention.”

We now find that our decision to grant appellant’s petition for discretionary review was improvident. See Tex.RApp.Pro. 202(k). Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.

CLINTON, J., dissents.