Legal Opinion

Christopher Arthur Tatum v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)

Decided May 20, 2014No. 14-13-00221-CRPublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KEM THOMPSON FROST, Chief Justice.

A jury convicted appellant Christopher Arthur Tatum of failing to comply with a requirement of the sex-offender registration program. The trial court found the enhancement allegations to be true and sentenced appellant to confinement in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice for twenty-five years. We affirm.

I. BACKGROUND

Appellant was convicted of aggravated rape in 1978, requiring him to register as a sex offender for his lifetime. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. art. 62.101(a)(1) (West Supp.2013); Tex.Code Crim. Proc. art.…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. King v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  2. Curry v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  3. Sharp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  4. Salinas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
  5. Young v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Craig Anthony Gilder v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2015
  2. Charles Ray Penigar v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2016
  3. Dwayne Cordova v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2015
  4. Jimmy Joe Garcia v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2016
  5. Penigar, Charles RayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2016

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API