Legal Opinion

Harrell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided January 12, 1983No. 63149-63159PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

These appeals are from convictions for obtaining a controlled substance by fraud. All eleven of these cases were tried before the same jury. The jury assessed punishment in each case at confinement for twenty years.

Eight of these cases (Nos. 63,149; 63,150; 63,152; 63,153; 63,154; 63,155; 63,-156; and 63,157) involved the obtaining of dilaudid. The indictment in each of these eight cases alleges that the appellant did “knowingly and intentionally acquire and obtain possession of a controlled substance, namely, DILAUDID by misrepresentation, fraud, forgery, deception and…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Graham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
  2. Gutierrez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1970
  3. Ex Parte HolbrookCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1980
  4. Ex parte EverettCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1982

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Dinkins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1995
  2. Mulder v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  3. Stephen v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
  4. Whitehead v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
  5. Flores v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2004

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API