Court Opinion

ID: 9766850
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 05:00:35.20388+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:26.708631
License: Public Domain

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
In our original opinion, we found merit in appellant’s thirty-seventh point of error which challenged the parole charge found unconstitutional in Rose v. State, 752 S.W.2d 529 (Tex.Crim.App.1988). The State has now filed a motion for rehearing, claiming in its sole point that there was no thirty-seventh point of error before this Court.
The State notes that we denied appellant’s motion to file a supplemental pro se brief on November 12, 1987, and contends that we reviewed the parole charge issue as unassigned error. We did not. The State appears to have overlooked appellant's motion, filed in this Court on December 11, 1987, to supplement counsel’s brief with point of error thirty-seven. This Court granted that motion on December 23, 1987. Accordingly, appellant’s thirty-seventh point of error was before this Court at the time of submission, and the issue raised was not addressed as unassigned error.
The State’s motion for rehearing is OVERRULED.