Court Opinion

ID: 9761391
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 01:41:41.082776+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:23.482030
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
ODOM, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of making a ter-roristic threat. See V.T.C.A., Penal Code *778Sec. 22.07. On original submission this case was reversed and remanded for a new trial due to the trial court’s failure to charge the jury on self-defense. We granted the State leave to file a motion for rehearing to reconsider this issue.
An examination of the record reveals that appellant’s objection to the charge was filed with and overruled by the trial court on November 3, 1977. The jury, however, was charged and returned its verdict the day before. There is nothing in this record to indicate that the appellant presented a timely objection to the court’s charge. In the absence of such an objection, appellant waived the error he now urges. Braudrick v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 572 S.W.2d 709, 711.
The State’s motion for rehearing is granted, the reversal is set aside and the judgment is affirmed.
Before the Court en banc.