Studer v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)
1Opinion of the Court
HECHT, Justice.
The dispositive issue in this case is whether an information which fails to allege recklessness in compliance with article 21.15, Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, confers jurisdiction upon the trial court. We hold that it does.
The issue arises in this context. Jimmy Randolph Studer pleaded nolo contendere to the charge of indecent exposure. The trial court assessed his punishment at 30 days’ confinement probated for six months, and a $300 fine. In a single point of error Studer complains that the information upon which he was convicted is fatally defective.
We agree with Studer…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Helms v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Aylor v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1987
- Gengnagel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Wheeler v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1982
- Shaw v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by22 opinions
- Studer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- Lemmons v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Murk v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1989
- Salazar v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1989
- Russell v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2002
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.