Satterwhite v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Satterwhite v. State

759 S.W.2d 436, 1988 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 189, 1988 WL 115390

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 2, 1988

DocketNo. 67220

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 759 S.W.2d 436 (Satterwhite 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

Satterwhite v. State, 759 S.W.2d 436, 1988 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 189, 1988 WL 115390 (Tex. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION ON REMAND FROM THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

DUNCAN, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of capital murder and the jury returned affirmative findings to the special issues submitted pursuant to Article 37.071(a), V.A.C.C.P., mandating that the trial court assess his punishment at death. Originally, this Court affirmed his conviction in Satterwhite v. State, 726 S.W.2d 81 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). The United States Supreme Court granted appellant’s petition for certiorari in Cause No. 86-6284, Satterwhite v. Texas, 486 U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 1792, 100 L.Ed.2d 284, and subsequently reversed this Court’s judgment affirming appellant’s conviction and remanded it to this Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with its opinion.

Accordingly, because no separate punishment hearing is authorized for error occurring at the punishment stage of a capital murder trial, under Article 44.29(c), V.A.C. C.P., appellant’s conviction is reversed and remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

WHITE, J., not participating.

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

OPINION ON REMAND FROM THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

DUNCAN, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of capital murder and the jury returned affirmative findings to the special issues submitted pursuant to Article 37.071(a), V.A.C.C.P., mandating that the trial court assess his punishment at death. Originally, this Court affirmed his conviction in Satterwhite v. State, 726 S.W.2d 81 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). The United States Supreme Court granted appellant’s petition for certiorari in Cause No. 86-6284, Satterwhite v. Texas, 486 U.S.-, 108 S.Ct. 1792, 100 L.Ed.2d 284, and subsequently reversed this Court’s judgment affirming appellant’s conviction and remanded it to this Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with its opinion.

Accordingly, because no separate punishment hearing is authorized for error occurring at the punishment stage of a capital murder trial, under Article 44.29(c), V.A.C. C.P., appellant’s conviction is reversed and remanded to the trial court for a new trial.

WHITE, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

759 S.W.2d 436, 1988 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 189, 1988 WL 115390, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/satterwhite-v-state-texcrimapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack