Mendoza v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ODOM, Judge.
This is an appeal from a conviction for delivery of Procaine under Art. 4476-14, Sec. 2(a)(2), V.A.C.S. 1 Punishment was assessed at confinement for six years.
Appellant raises three grounds of error on appeal, arguing that: (1) the indictment is fundamentally defective; (2) the evidence is insufficient to support the conviction; and, (3) trial was not commenced in compliance with the Texas Speedy Trial Act. We find these contentions to be without merit and the evidence is discussed as it relates to each ground of error.
Appellant first argues the indictment to be defective…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Barfield v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
- Pelham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1957
- Fraire v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
- Coleman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Cantu v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Saucedo, Andrew MelchorCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2019
- Hurwitz v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1984
- Mullen v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
- Moone v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
- Ngoc Van Le v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.