Davis v. State, 53247
Decision Date | 02 November 1977 |
Docket Number | No. 53247,53247 |
Parties | Lonnie Wayne DAVIS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
This is an appeal from a conviction for aggravated robbery. As enhanced, the punishment was assessed by the jury at 30 years' confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections.
The record reflects that appellant and two companions robbed at gunpoint the proprietor of a pool hall and domino parlor in Houston.
By supplemental brief, appellant urges fundamental error in that the charge ". . . authorized a conviction under every conceivable theory under V.T.C.A. Penal Code, Section 29.02 and Section 29.03, rather than limiting it to the theory alleged in the indictment." Appellant argues that our recent decision in Robinson v. State, 553 S.W.2d 371 (delivered July 13, 1977), is controlling. We agree and reverse.
As can be seen, the indictment alleged robbery under V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 29.02(a)(2), by alleging that the appellant intentionally and knowingly threatened and placed the complainant in fear of imminent bodily injury and death. The indictment then alleged the aggravating factor "by using and exhibiting a deadly weapon, namely, a pistol." V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 29.03(a)(2).
Accord Dowden v. State, 537 S.W.2d 5, 7 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), and the other authorities cited in Robinson, supra.
Because of the fundamental error we recognize, we need not discuss appellant's other grounds of error.
The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded.
The majority reversed this conviction because the charge permitted the jury to find appellant guilty of aggravated robbery under a theory not alleged in the indictment. Article 36.19, V.A.C.C.P., governing errors in the charge, provides in part that ". . . the judgment shall not be reversed unless the error appearing from the record was calculated to injure the...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Cumbie v. State
...regardless of the theory (or theories) alleged in the indictment. Robinson v. State, 553 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Davis v. State, 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Bridges v. State, 574 S.W.2d 143 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); McGee v. State, 575 S.W.2d 563 (Tex.Cr.App.1979); Todd v. State, 576 S......
-
Ex parte Coleman
...Gooden v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R. 347 and 351, 145 S.W.2d 177 and 179; Morter v. State, 551 S.W.2d 715 (Tex.Cr.App.); Davis v. State, 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.); Edmond v. State, 566 S.W.2d 609 (Tex.Cr.App.); Johnson v. State, 573 S.W.2d 778 (rehearing denied December 13, 1978); Brewer v. St......
-
Plunkett v. State
...authorizing convictions on theories not alleged in the indictments in Robinson v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 553 S.W.2d 371; Davis v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 557 S.W.2d 303; Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 939, and Edmond v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 566 S.W.2d 609. In Gooden v. State, 140 Tex.Cr.R.......
-
Harris v. State
...have fatally enlarged the allegations of the indictment therein. Gooden v. State, 576 S.W.2d 382 (Tex.Cr.App.1979); Davis v. State, 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); Robinson v. State, 553 S.W.2d 371 (Tex.Cr.App.1977).3 Article 40.09, Sec. 9, V.A.C.C.P.4 And almost needless to say, neither ......
-
Table of cases
...11:50 Davis v. State 313 S.W.3d 317 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) 1:140 - D - C-11 Table of Cases Name Citation Court Section Davis v. State 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977) 8:310, 8:390 Davis v. State 651 S.W.2d 787 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) 2:120 Davis v. State 964 S.W.2d 352 (Tex. App.—Fort W......
-
Offenses against property
...in the indictment as opposed to authorizing a conviction under every conceivable theory available under the statutes. Davis v. State , 557 S.W.2d 303 (Tex.Crim. App. 1977). For example, when the indictment alleges robbery by placing CD in fear of imminent bodily injury only, it is incorrect......