Court Opinion

ID: 9644045
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 20:47:28.867295+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:11:08.006249
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
PHILLIPS, Judge.
The State has adopted the dissent to the opinion on original submission as its brief on Motion for Rehearing. The dissent urges that the indictment in this case alleges an offense in terms of the statute, V.T. C.A. Penal Code, Section 32.31(b)(4). That subsection provides in pertinent part that a person commits an offense if •
., with knowledge that it has been stolen, [he] receives a credit card with intent to use it, to sell it, or to transfer it to a person other than the issuer or the cardholder; .
The indictment alleged that appellant . receive[d] an American Express Credti [sic] Card # 013-091-217-3-800A with intent to use it, without the effective consent of the cardholder.
An indictment must allege all the essential elements of the offense charged. Holcomb v. State, 573 S.W.2d 814 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Ex parte Mathis, 571 S.W.2d 186 (Tex.Cr.App.1978). The elements of the alleged offense are (1) a person (2) with knowledge that it has been stolen (3) receives a credit card (4) with intent to use it. There is no allegation in the indictment that appellant received the credit card “with knowledge that it has been stolen.” The indictment fails to allege an element of the offense charged and is fundamentally defective. Petitioner is entitled to relief.
The State’s Motion for Rehearing is denied.