Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

WILLIAM S. WORTHINGTON, Appellant v. THE STATE OF TEXAS

OPINION

The opinion of the Court was delivered PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted Appellant of murder and assessed his punishment at forty years. The trial court later revoked Appellant's probation for burglary and assessed punishment at ten years, cumulated with the murder sentence. The Court of Appeals held that the cumulation order was improper under Article 42.08 (a), V.A.C.C.P.,due to the order of the convictions. It modified the cumulation order and affirmed the conviction as reformed.Worthington v. State, 38 S.W.3d 815 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2001).

The State filed a petition for discretionary review, contending that the Court of Appeals erred by holding that the trial court's cumulation order was improper. At the time the Court of Appeals handed down its opinion, it did not have the benefit of this Court's decision in Pettigrew v. State, 48 S.W.3d 769 (Tex.Crim.App., 2001).

Accordingly, we grant the State's petition for discretionary review, vacate the Court of Appeals' judgment, and remand this cause to that court in light of Pettigrew.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

WORTHINGTON v. STATE
(Sep 12, 2001)