Legal Opinion · Dissent

Ex Parte Gibson

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 21, 1990No. 70723Published

1DissentClinton, Judge

The indictment in this cause fails to state facts from which it may be determined that the offense alleged occurred within the applicable period of limitations. That such is a defect of “substance” rather than form was demonstrated in Ex parte McFarland, 632 S.W.2d 621, at 623 (Tex.Cr.App.1982). The majority reasons that under amended Article 1.14(b), V.A.C.C.P., an indictment suffering even a defect of “substance” must be objected to prior to trial to preserve complaint on appeal or collateral attack. See Studer v. State, 799 S.W.2d 263 (Tex.Cr.App., delivered this day). In my view, however,…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Studer v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
  2. American Plant Food Corporation v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  3. Brasfield v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1980
  4. Ex parte McFarlandCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1982

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

Powered by the Exa API