Ford v. State

OPINION

BROOKSHIRE, Justice.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of unlawfully dispensing a controlled substance in violation of the Texas Controlled Substances Act, and his punishment was assessed at confinement for 10 years. Appellant does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence.

Appellant’s first ground of error challenges the indictment as being fundamentally defective “by failing to allege an offense.”

The indictment alleges the appellant on or about the 9th day of September, 1982, did then and there

“as a practitioner, namely: a physician, knowingly and intentionally dispense and cause…