Slayton v. State

OPINION

HOLMAN, Justice.

The appellant, Cecil Dorman Slayton, was convicted of indecency with a child. A jury assessed his punishment at confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections for a period of three years.

We affirm.

Appellant’s first ground of error complains that testimony of the psychiatrist *936called by the State invaded the province of the jury by expressing a conclusion as to appellant’s guilt.

We disagree.

Having qualified as an expert witness, the psychiatrist testified as to his opinion that the appellant was a type of person who might expose himself to a child.

It is not error for…