Gray v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Gray v. State

85 S.W.3d 300, 2002 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 166, 2002 WL 31079499

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedSeptember 18, 2002

DocketNo. 1784-01

StatusPublished

This text of 85 S.W.3d 300 (Gray 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

Gray v. State, 85 S.W.3d 300, 2002 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 166, 2002 WL 31079499 (Tex. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.,

delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court.

Appellant was convicted in a trial by jury of aggravated robbery. The jury subsequently assessed punishment at 15 years confinement in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. On appeal, appellant asserted that the trial court erred in entering a deadly-weapon finding in its judgment. The Texarkana Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence. Gray v. State, 51 S.W.3d 856 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2001). We granted appellant’s sole question for review: “Is it necessary to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to challenge a deadly weapon finding in the judgment?”

Having examined the record and briefs and considered the arguments in the case, we have reached the conclusion that our decision to grant review was improvident. We therefore dismiss the appellant’s petition as improvidently granted.

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

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.,

delivered the unanimous opinion of the Court.

Appellant was convicted in a trial by jury of aggravated robbery. The jury subsequently assessed punishment at 15 years confinement in the institutional division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. On appeal, appellant asserted that the trial court erred in entering a deadly-weapon finding in its judgment. The Texarkana Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction and sentence. Gray v. State, 51 S.W.3d 856 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2001). We granted appellant’s sole question for review: “Is it necessary to challenge the sufficiency of the evidence to challenge a deadly weapon finding in the judgment?”

Having examined the record and briefs and considered the arguments in the case, we have reached the conclusion that our decision to grant review was improvident. We therefore dismiss the appellant’s petition as improvidently granted.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

85 S.W.3d 300, 2002 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 166, 2002 WL 31079499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gray-v-state-texcrimapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack