TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

January v. State

Frank JANUARY, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee

January v. State, 732 S.W.2d 632 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 4, 1987
Docket
No. 832-85
Judges
Curium
Citations
732 S.W.2d 6321987 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 519

Opinion — Curium

OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW PER CURIUM.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of attempted capital murder. The jury assessed punishment at 50 years imprisonment in the Texas Department of Corrections. On appeal to the Corpus Christi Court of Appeals, appellant’s conviction was reversed and the indictment was ordered dismissed on the grounds that appellant’s rights against double jeopardy had been violated.

January v. State, 695 S.W.2d 215 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1985). The State petitioned this Court for discretionary review, contesting preservation of and alleging waiver of jeopardy error, and also contesting the merits of the Court of Appeals’ opinion on the resolution of the jeopardy issue. We granted review on only that portion of the State’s petition dealing with the merits of the double jeopardy claim. The grant was pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 200(b)(2), which states that we may review a decision where:

"... a court of appeals has decided an important question of state or federal law which has not been, but should be, settled by ... [this Court].”

We have reviewed that part of the Court of Appeals’ opinion dealing with the merits of the jeopardy issue * and find it to be sound. See May v. State, 726 S.W.2d 573 (Tex.Cr.App.1987). We therefore adopt that part of the opinion as our own, without further comment.

The judgment of the Court of Appeals is affirmed.

* January, supra at 220 , Column 2, Line 2 to end.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1987: 11989: 41990: 11991: 31992: 21999: 119872026peak 1989 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Rakestraw v. State765 S.W.2d 873 (Tex. App. 1989)
  2. Ex Parte Hawkins6 S.W.3d 554 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)
  3. Ex Parte Herron790 S.W.2d 623 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990)
  4. Ladner v. State780 S.W.2d 247 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989)
  5. Mixon v. State804 S.W.2d 107 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
  6. Keith v. State782 S.W.2d 861 (Tex. Crim. App. 1989)

Most recent

  1. Ex Parte Hawkins6 S.W.3d 554 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)
  2. Robinson v. State841 S.W.2d 392 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)
  3. Cook v. State840 S.W.2d 384 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992)
  4. Schalk v. State823 S.W.2d 633 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
  5. Mixon v. State804 S.W.2d 107 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)
  6. Garcia v. State806 S.W.2d 835 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
January v. State, 695 S.W.2d 215 (Tex. App.—Edinburg-Corpus Christi 1985) 26
May v. State, 726 S.W.2d 573 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) 45

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list