Armstrong v. State

I concur with the majority in their disposition of appellant Armstrong’s insufficiency of the evidence point of error. I also concur with the majority’s conclusion that under this record the State’s cross-appeal cannot be sustained under article 44.-01(a)(1) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. However, I respectfully dissent from the majority’s decision that the State cannot maintain its cross-appeal under article 44.01(c) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.

The majority concludes that because trial of the primary offense was before the court, the court, as the trier of fact, decided…