Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Clinton, Katherine

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided December 14, 2011No. PD-0119-11Published

1Concurrence

PRICE, J.,

filed a concurring opinion.

I agree with the Court’s conclusion that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish that the appellant “used” the debit card in this case.1 I agree that Section 32.31 of the Penal Code should not be construed in such a way as to require the State to prove that the perpetrator engaged in acquisitive conduct.2 But I arrive at this conclusion taking a somewhat different route than the Court does. I write separately to explain my own thinking in the matter.

As I understand the Court’s opinion, it finds that the plain language of Section 32.31(b)(1)…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Boykin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
  2. Patterson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1989
  3. Shipp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2011
  4. State v. RodriguezCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2011
  5. Clinton v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2010

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