Case Name: Pink Wayne SLOAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1991-04-24
Citations: 809 S.W.2d 224
Docket Number: No. 305-88
Parties: Pink Wayne SLOAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: CAMPBELL and WHITE, JJ., join this dissent.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 809
Pages: 224–230

Head Matter:
Pink Wayne SLOAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 305-88.
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
April 24, 1991.
Douglas E. Lowe, Palestine, for appellant.
Richard Handorf, Dist. Atty. & Joe Bridges, Asst. Dist. Atty., Palestine, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
OPINION ON STATE'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
PER CURIAM.
A jury convicted appellant of burglary of a building and assessed punishment at seven years confinement, probated. The Tyler Court of Appeals, relying on Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79, 106 S.Ct. 1712, 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986), and Keeton v. State, 724 S.W.2d 58 (Tex.Cr.App.1987), found the State improperly utilized a peremptory challenge to exclude from the jury the only member of appellant's race and reversed the conviction. Sloan v. State, 809 S.W.2d 234 (Tex.App.—Tyler 1988).
We granted the State's petition for discretionary review to determine the correctness of the Court of Appeals' holding. After reviewing the Court of Appeals' opinion, the briefs and the record, we conclude that the Court of Appeals reached the correct result and that our decision to grant this petition was improvident. Tex.R.App. Pro.Rule 202(k). As in every case where we determine that the decision to grant review was improvident we do not necessarily adopt either the language or reasoning of the lower court.
The State's petition for discretionary review is dismissed.