Dorado v. State

OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

We granted review on two grounds; the one more germane to the error found by the court of appeals reads as follows:

2. Is a harm analysis, pursuant to Tex. R.App.P. 81(b)(2), precluded if an appellate court determines that there has been a violation of the ‘mandatory’ notice requirements contained in Vernon's Ann. C.C.P. Art. 38.072, § 2(b).

State’s PDR, at 5. 1 See Dorado v. State, 824 S.W.2d 794 (Tex.App. — El Paso 1992), holding that since under Long v. State, 800 S.W.2d 545, at 547 (Tex.Cr.App.1990), compliance is necessary to “render…