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)

Mina GOLSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

FEDERICO G. HINOJOSA, Jr., Justice.

Appellant has filed an amended motion for rehearing in which she claims that we erred in addressing several of her appellate points. Appellant also argues, for the first time, that appellant's conviction must be reversed because the "stalking" provision of the Texas harassment statute is unconstitutional on its face. In light of Long v. State, 931 S.W.2d 285 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996), we reverse appellant's conviction and order the prosecution dismissed.

Appellant was convicted under the "stalking" provision of the harassment statute. In Long, the Court of Criminal Appeals determined that the "stalking" provision is facially unconstitutional. An unconstitutional statute is void from its inception. Rose v. State, 752 S.W.2d 529, 553 (Tex.Crim.App. 1987). Because of this ruling, appellant's conviction cannot stand.

Accordingly, appellant's conviction is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court to enter an order dismissing the prosecution. Long, at 297.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

GOLSON v. STATE
(Oct 3, 1996)