Degrate v. State

Decision Date09 July 1986
Docket NumberNo. 989-85,989-85
CitationDegrate v. State, 712 S.W.2d 755 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)
PartiesJerome Edward DEGRATE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Richard D. Williams, Cornel Walker (court appointed), Greenville, for appellant.

F. Duncan Thomas, Dist. Atty., Greenville, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.

OPINION ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted appellant of burglary with intent to commit sexual assault and assessed his punishment at 60 years confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections.On appeal the Fort Worth Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in an unpublished opinion.Degrate v. State, No. 02-84-099(Tex.App.--Fort Worth1985).

Appellant presents twelve grounds for review, which are an exact duplication of the grounds of error presented to the court of appeals.However, appellant's petition fails to present any reasons why this Court should review the opinion of the court of appeals.Tex.Cr.App.R. 304(d) provides that:

A petition for discretionary review shall be as brief as possible.It shall be addressed to "the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas" and shall state the name of the party or parties applying for review.The petition shall [emphasis added] include the following:

* * *

(5) Reasons for Review.A direct and concise argument, with supporting authorities, amplifying the reasons relied on for the granting of review.[emphasis added]SeeRule 302(c).The opinions of the court of appeals will be considered with the petition, and statements therein, if accepted by counsel as correct, need not be repeated.

Tex.Cr.App.R. 302(c) sets out six reasons 1 indicating the character of reasons to be considered in deciding whether to grant review.Although these reasons are not exhaustive, nothing in appellant's petition presents any reasons of similar character.The purpose of the petition for discretionary review is to present cogent, concise reasons why this Court should exercise its discretionary jurisdiction.These reasons are reflected by those set out in Rule 302(c), supra.The importance of the case to the jurisprudence of the State must, therefore, be made apparent in the petition for review.The assertion that the court of appeals was in error as to some point of law, standing alone, may be insufficient to require further review.

To this end, the portion of the petition designated "Reasons for Review" should specifically address the court of appeals opinion and its effect on our jurisprudence.This presentation should not go into a detailed analysis, but should briefly set out relevant cases and statutes, and note any alleged misstatements or omission of relevant facts.A discussion of principles of law, without reference to the holding of the court of appeals, will usually be insufficient to persuade this Court to exercise its discretionary jurisdiction.

Appellant has presented no reasons as to why this Court should review the opinion of the court of appeals.Therefore, appellant's petition for discretionary review is refused.2SeePumphrey v. State, 689 S.W.2d 466(Tex.Cr.App.1985);Delgado v. State, 687 S.W.2d 769(Tex.Cr.App.1985).

1Tex.Cr.App.R. 302(c) provides:

In determining whether to grant or deny discretionary review, the following, while neither controlling nor fully measuring the Court of Criminal Appeals' discretion, indicates the...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
35 cases
  • Hernandez v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 17, 1986
    ...this Court's discretionary jurisdiction, nor is any other reason readily apparent. The petition should be refused. Degrate v. State, 712 S.W.2d 755 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). II. The issue seized upon by the majority, whether to "follow in full the Strickland standards in determining effective assi......
  • Juarez v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 27, 1988
    ...(b) and (c), V.A.C.C.P.; Tex.R.App.Pro, Rules 90(a), 200(a), (b) and (c), 202(a), (d)(4) and (5), and 223(a); see Degrate v. State, 712 S.W.2d 755 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). Once this Court decides, as here, that the reason for decision given by a court of appeals is erroneous as a matter of law, C......
  • Dowden v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 21, 1988
    ...error and appellant fails to show or demonstrate why the Court of Appeals was in error in reaching its conclusion. See Degrate v. State, 712 S.W.2d 755 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). Although appellant contends he objected many times during the voir dire examination he does not point out in his brief j......
  • Gamez v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • September 23, 1987
    ...a claimed error on the part of a court of appeals is not likely to be a fit candidate for review. Id., Rule 202(d)(5); Degrate v. State, 712 S.W.2d 755 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). Here there are apt specific reasons for In the instant cause the opinions delivered in the San Antonio Court of Appeals ......
  • Get Started for Free