From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Harrell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Oct 9, 1991
820 S.W.2d 800 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 831-91.

October 9, 1991.

Appeal from 188th Judicial District Court, Gregg County; Larry W. Starr, J.

Odis R. Hill, Mark Engelhart, Longview, for appellant.

David Brabham, Dist. Atty., and C. Patrice Savage, Asst. Dist. Atty., Longview, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., and Matthew W. Paul, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.


OPINION ON STATE'S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


A jury convicted appellant of engaging in organized crime and assessed punishment at confinement for fifteen years. The Court of Appeals reversed appellant's conviction. Harrell v. State, 1991 WL 79989 (Tex.App. — Tyler, No. 12-89-00035-CR, delivered May 17, 1991).

The State, through the District Attorney of Gregg county and the State Prosecuting Attorney, has filed petitions for discretionary review contending that the Court of Appeals has erred in its review of the admission of evidence concerning an extraneous offense.

The Court of Appeals did not have the benefit of this Court's recent opinion in Montgomery v. State, 810 S.W.2d 372 (Tex.Cr.App. 1991), which discussed the applicable Texas Rules of Criminal Evidence dealing with the admission of extraneous offenses. Therefore, we summarily grant the State's petitions for discretionary review and remand this case to the Court of Appeals to reconsider the issue of the admission of the extraneous offense in light of Montgomery.


Summaries of

Harrell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Oct 9, 1991
820 S.W.2d 800 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
Case details for

Harrell v. State

Case Details

Full title:Wesley HARRELL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Oct 9, 1991

Citations

820 S.W.2d 800 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)

Citing Cases

Reina v. State

Furthermore, the State was required to prove Reina knew of the criminal purpose of the alleged combination.…

Nunez v. State

The alleged agreement is the essence of a conspiracy, not the overt act necessary to complete the offense.…