Palmer v. State

GUILLOT, Justice.

Wilson Palmer appeals his conviction for burglary of a habitation. In two grounds of error he contends: (1) that the indictment is fundamentally defective because it is vague on the element of “without effective consent;” and (2) that TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 30.02 (Vernon 1974), as interpreted by the Court of Criminal Appeals, is unconstitutionally vague. We disagree with both contentions. Consequently, we affirm.

Palmer’s first contention is that because the indictment fails to set out how consent in this cause was ineffective, it is fundamentally defective. It is by now…