Court Opinion

ID: 9772870
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 17:32:01.313949+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:31:48.988837
License: Public Domain

OPINION
HILL, Justice.
Danny Boy Hill appeals his conviction by a jury of the offense of forgery. The jury, finding that Hill had committed two prior felonies, assessed his punishment at sixty years in the Texas Department of Corrections. In his sole point of error, Hill contends that the indictment is fundamentally defective for failure to charge the offense of forgery, since it fails to allege that “the act was of another who did not authorize the act,” as required by section 32.21 of the Penal Code.
We affirm, because we find that Hill waived his right to raise an objection of such an error in the indictment on appeal since this indictment was returned after December 1, 1985, and Hill presented no pre-trial objection to the indictment. TEX. CODE CRIM.PROC.ANN. art. 1.14 (Vernon Supp.1988). Also, see Shaw v. State, 728 S.W.2d 889, 891 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1987, no pet.). All authorities cited by Hill predate December 1,1985, the effective date of article 1.14(b). We overrule Hill’s sole point of error.
The judgment is affirmed.