Moore v. State
This text of 612 S.W.2d 932 (Moore 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.
Opinion
*933 OPINION
This is an appeal from a conviction for burglary of a habitation. Punishment was assessed at eight years.
At the outset we are confronted with fundamental error that requires reversal in the interest of justicé. Art. 40.09(13), V.A. C.C.P.
The indictment in this case alleged burglary under V.T.C.A., Penal Code Sec. 30.-02(a)(3), by entering a habitation and committing theft. The jury charge, in contrast, submitted the case as one charging burglary by entering a habitation with intent to commit theft, under V.T.C.A., Penal Code Sec. 30.02(a)(1). This is precisely the same error as required reversal in Shaw v. State, 557 S.W.2d 305 (Tex.Cr.App.), and Whitlow v. State, 567 S.W.2d 522 (Tex.Cr.App.). Reversal is likewise required in this case. 1
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
. The brief raises a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence to corroborate the accomplice witness. The jury was not charged on the issue and the evidence did not show that the witness was an accomplice witness. Further discussion of that ground of error is not necessary.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
612 S.W.2d 932, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 933, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moore-v-state-texcrimapp-1981.