Case ID: sw2d_655/html/0208-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Archie Herman BURKHALTER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
    No. 986-82.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
    June 29, 1983.
    Joe W. Walsh and Lawrence A. Walsh, Brownsville, for appellant.
    Selden N. Snedeker, Former Dist. Atty. and Joe K. Hendley, Asst. Dist. Atty., Reynaldo S. Cantu, Jr., Dist. Atty. and Kirk Brush, Asst. Dist. Atty., Brownsville, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty. and Alfred Walker, Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.
   OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted of the offense of attempted murder and punishment was assessed at imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections for ten years. Appellant’s conviction was affirmed in a published opinion delivered by the Court of Appeals, Burkhalter v. State, 655 S.W.2d 215 (Tex.App. — Corpus Christi [13th] 1982).

It now appears that the decision to grant the appellant’s petition for discretionary review was improvident. Tex.Cr.App.R. 304(k); Art. 44.45(b)(6) and (7), V.A.C.C.P. See Hanna v. State, 632 S.W.2d 151 (Tex.Cr.App.1982).

The appellant’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.

CLINTON and TEAGUE, JJ., dissent.