Chapman v. State

I dissent from the majority’s resolution of point of error four. In point of error four, the appellant argues the trial court erred for refusing to submit an article 38.-231 charge.

The appellant contends he was entitled to an article 38.23 charge because there was a fact issue about the reason for the stop that led to his arrest. The officers testified they stopped the defendant because his license plate was not visible. The appellant testified his license plate was visible because it was propped up by a Kleenex box in the back window. See Reynolds v. State, 848 S.W.2d 148, 149…