Estrada v. State

Appellant was convicted by a jury of delivery of a controlled substance, by offer to sell.1 The Court of Appeals affirmed. Estrada v. State, 824 S.W.2d 770 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th], 1992). We granted appellant’s petition for discretionary review to determine whether the evidence was suf*334ficient to sustain the conviction.2 The majority finds that decision was improvident. Estrada v. State, 846 S.W.2d 332, 332 (Tex.Cr.App.1993). Judge Clinton dissents, believing the Court should decide when an offer to sell a controlled substance is complete. Estrada v. State, 846 S.W.2d 332, 333…