Hill v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Hill v. State

576 S.W.2d 642, 1979 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1358

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 7, 1979

Docket57531

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 576 S.W.2d 642 (Hill 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

Hill v. State, 576 S.W.2d 642, 1979 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1358 (Tex. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

DALLY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for the offense of aggravated robbery; the punishment, enhanced by proof of two prior convictions, is imprisonment for life.

In this case, as in Robinson v. State, 553 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Davis v. State, 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Jones v. State, 566 S.W.2d 939 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Brewer v. State, 572 S.W.2d 940 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Gooden v. State, 576 S.W.2d 382 (1979) (Opinion on Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing), and a number of other recent decisions, the instructions submitted to the jury authorized conviction for the offense charged in the indictment, but also authorized conviction for the offense committed by means other than that charged in the indictment. This is error. In Williams v. State, 535 S.W.2d 352 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), this was held to be error, but not to require reversal of the judgment. There were no objections at the time of trial to the erroneous instructions in the instant case. However, the majority of this Court has now held that it is fundamental error and that reversal is necessary even though no objection was made to the jury instructions in the trial court. Although the author of this opinion does not agree with the majority, see Gooden v. State, supra (Concurring Opinion on Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing) and Clements v. State, 576 S.W.2d 390 (1979), under the holdings of the majority the judgment must here be reversed.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

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

OPINION

DALLY, Judge.

This is an appeal from a conviction for the offense of aggravated robbery; the punishment, enhanced by proof of two prior convictions, is imprisonment for life.

In this case, as in Robinson v. State, 553 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Davis v. State, 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Jones v. State, 566 S.W.2d 939 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Brewer v. State, 572 S.W.2d 940 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Gooden v. State, 576 S.W.2d 382 (1979) (Opinion on Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing), and a number of other recent decisions, the instructions submitted to the jury authorized conviction for the offense charged in the indictment, but also authorized conviction for the offense committed by means other than that charged in the indictment. This is error. In Williams v. State, 535 S.W.2d 352 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), this was held to be error, but not to require reversal of the judgment. There were no objections at the time of trial to the erroneous instructions in the instant case. However, the majority of this Court has now held that it is fundamental error and that reversal is necessary even though no objection was made to the jury instructions in the trial court. Although the author of this opinion does not agree with the majority, see Gooden v. State, supra (Concurring Opinion on Appellant’s Motion for Rehearing) and Clements v. State, 576 S.W.2d 390 (1979), under the holdings of the majority the judgment must here be reversed.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

576 S.W.2d 642, 1979 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1358, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-state-texcrimapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack