Legal Opinion
Goldstein v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
Decided January 11, 1991No. 05-89-01391-CRPublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WHITHAM, Justice.
Appellant appeals a conviction for securing execution of a document by deception. Tex.Penal Code Ann. § 32.46 (Vernon 1989). The jury assessed punishment at two years imprisonment, probated for two years. We find no merit in any of appellant’s ten points of error. Accordingly, we affirm.
Descriptive Background
Appellant, an assistant Dallas County District Attorney at the time of the offense, owned a condominium that incurred water damage. Appellant submitted a claim to his insurance company and the claim was settled. In settlement of the claim, the insurance company…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McDonald v. MissouriSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Plante v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
- Bates v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
- Cheney v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Garrett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Lee v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2000
- State v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceNevada Supreme Court · 2000
- Tom Bennett and James B. Bonham Corporation v. Larry Wayne GrantTexas Supreme Court · 2017
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Commissioner of Insurance of NevadaNevada Supreme Court · 1998
- Briones v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2002
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.