Aguilar v. State

Jun 3, 1992
No. 436-92
Reporters:
, ,

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted appellant of robbery and assessed his punishment at confinement ‍​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‍for fifty years after finding he was a habitual offender. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, finding that appellant had not made a prima ‍​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‍facie showing that the State had exercised one of its peremptory strikes to exclude a member of the venire on the basis of race. Aguilar v. ‍​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‍State, 826 S.W.2d 760 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth, 1992).

Appellant raises three grounds for review. After careful review we refuse appellant’s petition for review. However, as is true in every ‍​​‌‌‌​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​​​​​​​​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌​‌‍case in which 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.