Shannon v. State

693 S.W.2d 390, 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1762
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 23, 1985
Docket846-84
StatusPublished
Cited by9 cases

This text of 693 S.W.2d 390 (Shannon 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
Shannon v. State, 693 S.W.2d 390, 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1762 (Tex. 1985).

Opinion

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appeal is taken from a conviction for aggravated robbery. After the jury found appellant guilty, the court found that appellant had twice previously been convicted of felony offenses. Punishment was assessed at life. Appellant’s conviction was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Shannon v. State, 681 S.W.2d 142 (Tex.App. — Houston [14th] 1984).

We agree with the Court of Appeals that appellant’s convictions should be affirmed. Accordingly, appellant’s petition for discretionary review will be refused. *391 As is true in every case, refusal of discretionary review by this Court does not constitute an endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals.

To prevent any misunderstanding, we take this opportunity to emphasize that the summary refusal of a petition for discretionary review by this Court is of no precedential value. This is true where the petition is refused without opinion, as is the usual practice, as well as where the petition is refused with a brief opinion disavowing the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals, as in the instant case. The Bench and Bar of the State should not assume that the summary refusal of a petition for discretionary review lends any additional authority to the opinion of the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983); Campbell v. State, 647 S.W.2d 660 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is refused.

CLINTON, J., dissents. TEAGUE, J., dissents on first ground for review.

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

Related

Richard Earl Daniels v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007
Joel Cowart v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2000
Garrett v. State
749 S.W.2d 784 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1988)
Swanson v. State
722 S.W.2d 158 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1987)
Munoz Ex Rel. Martinez v. Cameron County
725 S.W.2d 319 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1986)
Carroll v. State
701 S.W.2d 913 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1986)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
693 S.W.2d 390, 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1762, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shannon-v-state-texcrimapp-1985.