Gawlik v. State

OPINION

TOM G. DAVIS, Judge.

Appeal is taken from a conviction for theft of services with a value of over $200.00 but under 110,00o. 1 Appellant was convicted in a trial before the court and punishment was assessed at two years, probated.

In his first ground of error, appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction. He contends that “the requisite intent was not present and the sequential steps of Cortez [v. State [Tex.Cr.App.], 582 S.W.2d 119,] apply because of the evidence adduced at the trial.”

C. C. Murski testified that he was a painting contractor in Houston.…