Court Opinion

ID: 9892263
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-22 15:12:05.348924+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T08:02:07.588564
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                          OF TEXAS
                                          NO. PD-0242-19

                                WILLIAM ROGERS, Appellant

                                                   v.

                                    THE STATE OF TEXAS

            ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
                 FROM THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS
                             REFUGIO COUNTY

    Per curiam. RICHARDSON, J., filed a concurring opinion in which HERVEY,
WALKER, and SLAUGHTER, JJ., joined. KELLER, P.J., and KEEL, J., dissented.

                                           OPINION

        Appellant was convicted by a jury of burglary of a habitation.1 On direct appeal,

appellant challenged the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury on certain defensive

issues. The court of appeals held that error in the jury charge, if any, was harmless.

Rogers v. State, 527 S.W.3d 329, 335 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2017). We granted

        1
          Appellant was also convicted of aggravated assault, but that conviction was vacated by the
court of appeals. Rogers v. State, 527 S.W.3d 329, 336 (Tex. App. – Corpus Christi 2018).
                                                                     ROGERS PD-0242-19 – 2

appellant’s petition for discretionary review and reversed, holding that if error existed, it

was harmful. Rogers v. State, 550 S.W.3d 190, 196 (Tex. Crim. App. 2018). Accordingly,

we remanded to the court of appeals to decide, in the first instance, whether the trial court

erred in failing to instruct on the defensive issues. Id.

       On remand, the court of appeals held that the trial court had not erred in failing to

instruct on the requested defensive issues. Rogers v. State, No. 13-15-00600-CR (Tex.

App.–Corpus Christi Jan. 10, 2019)(not designated for publication). Appellant again filed

a petition for discretionary review which this Court granted. On October 26, 2022, we

issued an opinion reversing the court of appeals and holding that appellant was entitled to

jury instructions on the defensive issues. Rogers v. State, No. PD-0242-19 (Tex. Crim.

App. Oct. 26, 2022).

       The State has now filed a “Motion to Withdraw Appellate Opinions and

Permanently Abate the Appeal” as a result of appellant’s death which occurred in March

of 2022. A copy of the death certificate is attached to the State’s motion.

       We grant the State’s motion, dismiss Appellant’s petition for discretionary review,

withdraw our 2018 and 2022 opinions, and order the court of appeals to withdraw its

2017 and 2019 opinions and permanently abate the appeal. See Brown v. State, 439

S.W.3d 929 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)(where defendant died while rehearing motion

pending, Court dismissed petition and rehearing motion, withdrew its opinion, and

ordered court of appeals to withdraw opinion and permanently abate appeal).
                             ROGERS PD-0242-19 – 3

Delivered October 18, 2023
Publish