Cornwell, Robert William, PD-1501-14

Cornwell was charged with impersonating a public servant under Tex. Penal Code § 37.11(a)(1) for allegedly pretending to be a Dallas County Assistant District Attorney to influence a probation case.
There was no evidence that Cornwell intended to induce Teaff to submit to pretended official authority; Teaff testified he acted in his personal capacity.
The State asserted Cornwell intended to induce Teaff to rely on his pretended official acts by referencing prior official acts, not by asserting a current pretended act.
The court of appeals affirmed the conviction, rejecting the element requiring a pretended official act, and focusing on Cornwell’s intent to induce reliance.
Cornwell argued the charging instrument required him to pretend to act in an official capacity, and that mere identification as a public official is insufficient.
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals granted discretionary review to resolve whether an impersonation conviction requires proof that the defendant pretended to act officially.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Must the State prove the defendant pretended to act in official capacity to induce reliance?	Cornwell	State	Yes; pretended official act required
Was there legally sufficient evidence to sustain conviction without a pretended official act?	Cornwell	State	No; insufficiency; reversal warranted
Should the court remand or acquit given the error in elements?	Cornwell	State	Acquittal appropriate; or remand for proper analysis

Niswanger v. State, 335 S.W.3d 611 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (requires overt action in official capacity beyond mere identification)
Tiller v. State, 362 S.W.3d 125 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2011) (distinction on whether act is in pretended official capacity; relied on for official-action element)
Tovar v. State, 777 S.W.2d 481 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1989) (false pretension and overt action in official capacity required)