Kolbert v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DOUGLAS, Judge.
The conviction was for the possession of opium. The court assessed punishment at fifteen years.
Kolbert, on appeal, argues that the indictment is fundamentally defective because it cannot be ascertained whether a felony or misdemeanor is charged.
The indictment alleges that Kolbert did “. . knowingly and intentionally possess a controlled substance, namely, opium.”
The Controlled Substances Act, Article 4476-15, Section 4.02, V.A.C.S., sets out various penalty groups and the drugs assigned to each. Opium and its extracts, including tincture of opium, are assigned to Penalty…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Benoit v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1977
- Suarez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1976
- Whitaker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
3Cited by8 opinions
- Stockton v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1985
- Brandon Linn Dudley v. State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2001
- Dudley v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2001
- Dudley v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2001
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.