Hill v. State

690 S.W.2d 900, 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1434
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided June 12, 1985·No. No. 1141-84·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of aggravated robbery by a jury. Punishment was assessed at imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections for seven years by the Court. The Houston Fourteenth Court of Appeals affirmed. Hill v. State, 681 S.W.2d 765 (Tex.App.—Houston [14] 1984).

As in every case, this Court’s decision to refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review should not be construed as approval by this Court of the language or reasoning used by the Court of Appeals in reaching its decision. The Texas Speedy Trial Act, Article 32A.01 et seq., V.A.C. C.P., speaks in terms of “transactions” and “offenses” not in terms of “cases.” Rosebury v. State, 659 S.W.2d 655, 659 (Tex.Cr.App.1983) (Clinton J. concurring). We expressly disapprove of the Court of Appeal’s discussion of whether the waiver of speedy trial involved the “same case.”

Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is refused.

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

Hill v. State, 690 S.W.2d 900, 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1434 (Tex. 1985).

690 S.W.2d 900 (Hill v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Smith v. State
887 S.W.2d 948 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Garrett v. State
749 S.W.2d 784 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1988)
Hill v. State
730 S.W.2d 86 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Carroll v. State
701 S.W.2d 913 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1986)