Case ID: sw2d_840/html/0958-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. BAIRD, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Willie B. THOMAS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
    No. 547-91.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
    Nov. 18, 1992.
    
      Kenneth W. Smith, Houston, for appellant.
    John B. Holmes, Jr., Dist. Atty., and Winston E. Cochran, Jr. and Susan Baetz Brown, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.
   OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

A jury found Appellant guilty of possession of cocaine. The court found the enhancement allegations to be true and assessed punishment at confinement for thirty-five years. The Court of Appeals reversed Appellant’s conviction. Thomas v. State, 807 S.W.2d 786 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st] 1991) (opinion on rehearing).

After further consideration of the petition for discretionary review and the opinion of the Court of Appeals, we have determined that the State’s petition was improvidently granted.

The State’s petition for discretionary review is dismissed.

BAIRD, J.,

dissents, believing the case should be remanded to the Court of Appeals to conduct a harm analysis pursuant to TRAP 81(b)(2).

WHITE, J., joins this note.