Land v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Land v. State

709 S.W.2d 671, 1986 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 735

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided May 21, 1986·No. No. 814-85·Published

Opinion

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of theft of cattle. On appeal, a panel majority of the Austin Court of Appeals held that the time between a no bill from a grand jury and the true bill of indictment brought by a second grand jury was properly ex-cludable under Sec. 4(10) of the Speedy Trial Act, Art. 32A.02, C.C.P., as an exceptional circumstance. Land v. State, 695 S.W.2d 712 (Tex.App.-Austin 1985). We refuse the petition for discretionary review, however, our refusal of appellant’s petition for discretionary review is not to be taken as an approval of the reasoning of the Court of Appeals on this ground of error.

With this understanding, we refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review.

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

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of theft of cattle. On appeal, a panel majority of the Austin Court of Appeals held that the time between a no bill from a grand jury and the true bill of indictment brought by a second grand jury was properly ex-cludable under Sec. 4(10) of the Speedy Trial Act, Art. 32A.02, C.C.P., as an exceptional circumstance. Land v. State, 695 S.W.2d 712 (Tex.App.-Austin 1985). We refuse the petition for discretionary review, however, our refusal of appellant’s petition for discretionary review is not to be taken as an approval of the reasoning of the Court of Appeals on this ground of error.

With this understanding, we refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review.

Land v. State, 709 S.W.2d 671, 1986 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 735 (Tex. 1986).

Pincite

709 S.W.2d 671 (Land v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related