Case ID: sw2d_776/html/0197-01.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

George GONZALES, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
    No. 518-89.
    Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
    Sept. 13, 1989.
    Elizabeth N. Golden (Court-appointed), San Marcos, for appellant.
    Jeffrey L. Van Horn, Dist. Atty., Lock-hart, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.
   OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted by a jury for burglary of a building, and the trial court assessed punishment, enhanced by a prior conviction, at twenty years confinement. The conviction was affirmed. Gonzales v. State, 766 S.W.2d 395 (Tex.App.-Austin 1989). Appellant filed a petition for discretionary review raising one ground for review.

We have considered the issues raised and find that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result. The petition for discretionary review will be refused. As is true in every case where this Court refuses a petition for discretionary review, this refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. See Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

With this understanding, appellant’s petition for discretionary review is refused.