Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
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)
Judges

Larry Wallace MOFFETT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted appellant of possession of cocaine and of investing in the manufacture of methamphetamine. The trial court assessed his punishment at 20 years and life, respectively, in the Texas Department of Corrections, with a $50,000 fine also imposed in the investment conviction. Both convictions were affirmed on appeal. Moffett v. State, 716 S.W.2d 558 (Tex.App. — Dallas 1986).

Appellant raises eight grounds for review. We agree with the Court of Appeals that none require reversal. However, we do not necessarily agree with the Court of Appeals that appellant did not preserve his State law grounds relating to the validity of the search warrant relied upon in the search of appellant's house. See Polk v. State, 738 S.W.2d 274 (Tex.Cr.App. 1987). As is true in every case where discretionary review is refused, this refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App. 1983).

With this understanding, we refuse appellant's petition for discretionary review.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Moffett v. State
(May 25, 1988)