Wirth v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Wirth v. State

327 S.W.3d 164, 2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1675, 2010 WL 5129062

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedDecember 15, 2010

DocketPD-1716-09

StatusPublished

Cited by18 cases

This text of 327 S.W.3d 164 (Wirth 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

Wirth v. State, 327 S.W.3d 164, 2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1675, 2010 WL 5129062 (Tex. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court

in which KELLER, P.J., PRICE, WOMACK, KEASLER, HERVEY, HOLCOMB, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.

Appellant was indicted for the offense of theft of property over $200,000 pursuant to one scheme and continuing course of conduct. Tex. Penal Code .§ 31.03(a). A jury convicted appellant of the lesser offense of theft of $20,000 or more but less than $100,000, assessed a punishment of ten years’ imprisonment and a $10,000 fine, and recommended community supervision. Wirth v. State, 296 S.W.3d 895, 897 (Tex. App,-Texarkana 2009). The trial court sentenced appellant to ten years’ incarceration, probated for five years, fined him $10,000, and ordered him to pay restitution of $128,103.27.

In the court of appeals, appellant argued that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to support the verdict because the evidence could not support a finding of intent to commit theft. The court of appeals held that the evidence was factually *165 insufficient to support the verdict, pursuant to Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). Wirth v. State, 296 S.W.3d 895 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2009).

At the time that the court of appeals considered this case, this Court had not issued its opinion in Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex.Crim.App.2010), in which we overruled Clewis. We therefore vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to that court for reconsideration pursuant to Brooks.

MEYERS, J., dissented.

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

OPINION

JOHNSON, J.,

delivered the opinion of the Court

in which KELLER, P.J., PRICE, WOMACK, KEASLER, HERVEY, HOLCOMB, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.

Appellant was indicted for the offense of theft of property over $200,000 pursuant to one scheme and continuing course of conduct. Tex. Penal Code .§ 31.03(a). A jury convicted appellant of the lesser offense of theft of $20,000 or more but less than $100,000, assessed a punishment of ten years’ imprisonment and a $10,000 fine, and recommended community supervision. Wirth v. State, 296 S.W.3d 895, 897 (Tex. App,-Texarkana 2009). The trial court sentenced appellant to ten years’ incarceration, probated for five years, fined him $10,000, and ordered him to pay restitution of $128,103.27.

In the court of appeals, appellant argued that the evidence was legally and factually insufficient to support the verdict because the evidence could not support a finding of intent to commit theft. The court of appeals held that the evidence was factually *165 insufficient to support the verdict, pursuant to Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). Wirth v. State, 296 S.W.3d 895 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 2009).

At the time that the court of appeals considered this case, this Court had not issued its opinion in Brooks v. State, 323 S.W.3d 893 (Tex.Crim.App.2010), in which we overruled Clewis. We therefore vacate the judgment of the court of appeals and remand the case to that court for reconsideration pursuant to Brooks.

MEYERS, J., dissented.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

327 S.W.3d 164, 2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1675, 2010 WL 5129062, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/wirth-v-state-texcrimapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack