Moore v. State

612 S.W.2d 932, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 933
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMarch 18, 1981
Docket60429
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

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.

Bluebook
Moore v. State, 612 S.W.2d 932, 1981 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 933 (Tex. 1981).

Opinion

*933 OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

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.

1

. 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

Villarreal v. State
643 S.W.2d 790 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
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.