Ex Parte Porter

In Minix v. State, 579 S.W.2d 466 (Tex.Cr.App.1979) (op. on Reh’g.), we placed a particular construction on the Texas forgery statute, namely that the simple use of the word “forge” in the indictment was insufficient because Tex.Pen.Code Ann. Sec. 32.21(a)(l)(A)(i) required the indictment to allege that the purported maker did not authorize the act of making the writing. Indictments which lacked that allegation were fundamentally defective. Id. at 467. *328With the exception of Judge Clinton’s dissent in Minix, which was joined by only one other judge, and Judge Clinton’s dissent in Landry v.…