From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Johnson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jan 29, 1997
938 S.W.2d 65 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

Summary

vacating court of appeals' judgment and remanding for consideration of issue raised, but not addressed

Summary of this case from Benavides v. State

Opinion

No. 1435-96.

January 29, 1997.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court Number One, Tarrant County, George S. Kredell, J.


OPINION ON STATE'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


Appellant was convicted of aggravated sexual assault, sexual assault, and two counts of incest. The jury sentenced him to thirty-five years, twenty years, ten years, and ten years of confinement for the respective offenses. On appeal, Appellant contended the trial court erred by admitting testimony of a drug abuse counselor in violation of the privilege contained in Tex. R. Crim. Evid. 510. The Court of Appeals agreed and reversed the convictions. Johnson v. State, 926 S.W.2d 334 (Tex.App. — Fort Worth 1996).

In its appellate brief, the State argued that the complainant's mother, who was also Appellant's wife, previously testified without objection about the meeting with the drug abuse counselor and that when the same evidence is presented elsewhere during trial without objection, no reversible error exists, citing McFarland v. State, 845 S.W.2d 824, 840 (Tex.Cr.App. 1992). The State's first ground for review, in the petition for discretionary review filed by the District Attorney, contends the Court of Appeals erred in not addressing this argument. We agree. A court of appeals must address every issue raised and necessary to the final disposition of the case. See Tex.R.App.Pro. 90(a); Cardwell v. State, 881 S.W.2d 712 (Tex.Cr.App. 1994); Ikner v. State, 848 S.W.2d 161 (Tex.Cr.App. 1993); King v. State, 848 S.W.2d 142 (Tex.Cr.App. 1993).

We grant ground one of the State's (District Attorney's) petition for discretionary review. The judgment of the Court of Appeals is vacated and the case is remanded to the Court of Appeals for action consistent with this opinion. The remaining grounds and the State Prosecuting Attorney's petition for discretionary review are dismissed without prejudice.


Summaries of

Johnson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Jan 29, 1997
938 S.W.2d 65 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

vacating court of appeals' judgment and remanding for consideration of issue raised, but not addressed

Summary of this case from Benavides v. State
Case details for

Johnson v. State

Case Details

Full title:James Lee JOHNSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Jan 29, 1997

Citations

938 S.W.2d 65 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

Citing Cases

Johnson v. State

On the State's petition for discretionary review, the Court of Criminal Appeals vacated our judgment and…

Benavides v. State

The en banc court then overruled the motion for rehearing without addressing the issue in point of error one:…