Taylor, Henry Jr.

OPINION

in which MEYERS, WOMACK, KEASLER, HERVEY, COCHRAN and ALCALA, JJ., joined. ■

The appellant in this case argues that he was convicted of theft solely because his apparent “ineptitude” prevented him from adequately fulfilling his contractual obligations. In a published split decision, the Sixth Court of Appeals affirmed the appellant’s conviction for theft in an amount between $1,500 and $20,000, a state-jail felony.1 The majority found that the evidence would support a rational inference that, by the time the appellant took a second installment payment on the contract in the amount of…