Hughes v. State

Mar 20, 1985
No. 812-84
Reporters:
,

OPINION ON REFUSAL OF APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Under a ‍‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‍heading, “SELECTIVE PROSECUTION,” the published opinion of the Austin Court of Appeals somewhat cryptically states:

“Further the evidence from the statement of ‍‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‍facts clearly shows that since McWilliams [v. State, 634 S.W.2d 815] supra, with the abandonment of the carving doctrine, multiple charges can be ‍‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‍filed in a single criminal episode involving a single victim.”

Hughes v. State, 673 S.W.2d 654, 659 (Tex.App.—Austin 1984), petition refused.

The above quoted ‍‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‍statement should be read in light of opinions of this Court in Drake v. State, 686 S.W.2d 935 (Tex.Cr.App.1985) and Ex parte Siller, 686 S.W.2d 617 (Tex.Cr.App.1985), ‍‌‌‌​​​​​​​‌​‌​​‌​‌​​​​​‌​​​‌​​​‌‌‌​‌​‌​‌​‌‌​‌‌‌​​​​‌‌‌‌​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌​‌​‍both delivered February 27, 1985.

The petition for discretionary review is refused.