Shabaz Andrews v. State

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedFebruary 13, 2019
Docket10-17-00395-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Shabaz Andrews v. State (Shabaz Andrews v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shabaz Andrews v. State, (Tex. Ct. App. 2019).

Opinion

IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-17-00395-CR

SHABAZ ANDREWS, Appellant v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

From the 12th District Court Walker County, Texas Trial Court No. 27658

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Shabaz Andrews pled guilty without the benefit of a plea bargain to Paragraph

One of a two paragraph indictment. Thus, he was convicted of aggravated assault with

a deadly weapon/family violence, see TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 22.02(b)(1) (West 2011),

and sentenced to 40 years in prison. We affirm.

Andrews has no complaint about the trial court’s judgment that was rendered.

Rather, in one issue, he raises a double jeopardy complaint regarding Paragraph Two of

the indictment which charged Andrews with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. See id. § 22.02(a)(2). The State has not tried to pursue a prosecution regarding Paragraph

Two.

The proper time to assert any potential claim of jeopardy which a defendant might

have is in a future prosecution after he has been charged or indicted for the potentially

jeopardy-barred offense. See Burks v. State, 876 S.W.2d 877, 889 (Tex. Crim. App. 1994);

Keith v. State, 782 S.W.2d 861, 864 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989). At this time, that issue is far

from ripe and is not properly before this Court. Id.; Garrett v. State, 749 S.W.2d 784, 804

(Tex. Crim. App. 1988) (“The Court of Appeals had no power to decide that issue because

the issue of double jeopardy could only arise if appellant were subsequently charged with

some lesser included offense.”). Any attempt by this Court to address Andrews’ issue

would be advisory and unauthorized. Garrett, 749 S.W.2d at 803.

Accordingly, Andrews’ sole issue is dismissed, and the trial court’s judgment is

affirmed.

TOM GRAY Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Justice Scoggins1 Affirmed Opinion delivered and filed February 13, 2019 Do not publish [CRPM]

1 The Honorable Al Scoggins, Senior Justice of the Tenth Court of Appeals, sitting by assignment of the Chief Justice of the Texas Supreme Court. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. §§ 74.003, 75.002, 75.003 (West 2013).

Andrews v. State Page 2

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

Related

Keith v. State
782 S.W.2d 861 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1989)
Burks v. State
876 S.W.2d 877 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Garrett v. State
749 S.W.2d 784 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1988)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Shabaz Andrews v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shabaz-andrews-v-state-texapp-2019.