Schweinle v. State

I dissent. The majority disagrees with the Court of Appeals’ analysis on whether appel*21lant was entitled to a jury instruction on false imprisonment. See Schweinle v. State, 893 S.W.2d 708, 714-15 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1995). The issue in this case is whether there is some evidence in the record that would permit a jury rationally to find that appellant is guilty only of false imprisonment; or, in other words, whether there is some evidence in the record that would permit a jury rationally to find that appellant is guilty only of intentionally or knowingly restraining the victim,…