McCarty v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

McCarty v. State

820 S.W.2d 795, 1991 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 176, 1991 WL 183132

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedSeptember 18, 1991

DocketNo. 562-90

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 820 S.W.2d 795 (McCarty 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

McCarty v. State, 820 S.W.2d 795, 1991 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 176, 1991 WL 183132 (Tex. 1991).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted appellant of aggravated possession of amphetamine, a controlled substance. Tex.Rev.Civ.Stat.Ann. art. 4476-15, §§ 4.041(a) and (c), and 4.02(d)(1)(A), see now Tex.Health & Safety Code Ann. §§ 481.116(a) and (c) and 481.-103(a)(3). The jury sentenced appellant to seven years in prison, probated, and a suspended $5,000 fine.

On direct appeal, the Court of Appeals found the evidence insufficient, reversed appellant’s conviction and entered an order of acquittal. McCarty v. State, 788 S.W.2d 213 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth, 1990). We granted the State’s petition for discretionary review to determine whether the Court of Appeals erred in its sufficiency analysis.

We have reconsidered the issue raised and find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. We decline to comment on the language or reasoning of the lower court. The State’s petition for discretionary review was improvidently granted and is accordingly dismissed. See Tex.R.App. Pro. 202(k).

WHITE, J., concurs in the result. McCORMICK, P.J., dissents.

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