Greathouse v. State

OPINION

UTTER, Justice.

In a jury trial, appellant was convicted of aggravated robbery; punishment was assessed by the court at twenty-five years imprisonment. The sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction is not challenged. We affirm.

In his first ground of error appellant contends that the charging portion of his indictment was fundamentally void because it substituted the word “steal” for the word “appropriate” and thus failed to follow the statutory definition of theft.

Section 31.03(a) of the Texas Penal Code defines theft as follows:

A person commits an offense if he unlawfully…