Court Opinion

ID: 9596734
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-22 00:52:36.656266+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:41:00.521306
License: Public Domain

GRANT, Justice,
concurring.
I do not agree with the majority opinion that counsel would be required to make an objection to such fundamental error, because the trial strategy might make such an objection imprudent. However, I concur with the results because the appropriate action by counsel would have been to move to recuse the trial judge on the basis that the trial judge had expressed an unwillingness to consider the entire range of punishment. A motion to recuse is considered timely filed when the matter for recusal arises even after the ten day deadline set in Tex.R. Civ. P. 18(a). Martin v. *195State, 876 S.W.2d 396 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 1994, no pet.); Keene Corp. v. Rogers, 863 SW.2d 168 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1993, no pet.).