Francis v. State
This text of 922 S.W.2d 176 (Francis 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.
Opinions
OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
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. [177]*177202(k). Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
922 S.W.2d 176, 1996 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 66, 1996 WL 252692, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/francis-v-state-texcrimapp-1996.