From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wilson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Apr 7, 1993
853 S.W.2d 547 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 1569-89.

April 7, 1993.

Appeal from County Court at Law No. 1, Travis County; Leslie D. Taylor, Judge.

Terrence W. Kirk, Austin, for appellant.

Ken Oden, County Atty., and Giselle Horton, Asst. County Atty., Austin, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.


OPINION ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


Appellant Chester Lewis Wilson was convicted by a jury of disruptive activity on a university campus. V.T.C.A., Education Code, Section 4.30(a), (b)(2) (1972). The trial court assessed punishment at six months' incarceration and a fine of $200.00. The Austin Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction in a published opinion. Wilson v. State, 777 S.W.2d 823 (Tex.App. — Austin 1989). We granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to determine if the Court of Appeals erred in failing to ascertain whether Section 4.30 of the Texas Education Code is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad by holding that appellant waived his constitutional claim by failing to inform the trial court of the precise nature of his complaint.

The judgments of the trial court and the Court of Appeals are affirmed for the reasons set out in Arnold v. State, 853 S.W.2d 543 (Tex.Cr.App., this day delivered).

OVERSTREET, J., concurs.

CLINTON, J., dissents.


Summaries of

Wilson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Apr 7, 1993
853 S.W.2d 547 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993)
Case details for

Wilson v. State

Case Details

Full title:Chester Lewis WILSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Apr 7, 1993

Citations

853 S.W.2d 547 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Shaw v. State

An element of the defense is "raised" if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant,…

Shaw v. State

But the evidence must be such that it will support a rational jury finding as to each element of the defense.…