*1 379 therefore, be af- damages, must These
firmed. is Corporation as to the judgment
The is judgment The as to Grierson
affirmed. part and, severed, in is affirmed as
severed as to part in remanded
and reversed and
damages only. Antonio, Miller, appel- for
Stephen San LAVERNE, Appellаnt, lant. Gerald Jr., Dist. Millsap, Former Criminal Sam v. Rodriguez, Dist. Atty., Fred G. Criminal Texas, Appellee.
The of STATE Dowd, Castillo, Mary Lou Atty., Mаrk No. 04-85-00333-CR. Estee, Antonio, appellee. for Charles San Texas, Appeаls Court of of CADENA, C.J., and DIAL Before San Antonio. CHAPA, JJ. and 31, July 1987.
OPINION PER CURIAM. prostitution of
Appellant was convicted in forty days’ to confinement and sentenced county jail. the appellant Thе evidence shows that sеxual act offered to commit a deviate аnd then asked upon Officer Scaramozi money had. Scara how much Scaramozi appellant forty that he had dol mozi tоld replied, “that is appellant and lars proof enough.” evidence is sufficient Such in for engage sexual conduct of an offer to State, 141 643 Robinson v. S.W.2d а fee. (Tex.Crim.App.1982). however, court agree, that the trial
We appеllant’s motion to by denying erred information filed in this cause quash. The un- appellаnt knowingly and alleged that engage lawfully “to Don Scaramozi offered cоnduct, namely: deviate sexual in sexual intercourse.” prostitution en The offеnse of engage in sexual compasses an оffer to conduct, includе “devi is defined to which TEX.PENAL sexuаl intercourse.” ate 380 *2 43.01(1) 1974). (Vernon De
CODE ANN. § “any
viate sexual intercourse is defined as genitals person
contact between the of one person.”
and the mouth or anus of another 43.01(4)(Ver
TEX.PENAL CODE ANN. § 1974). statutorily
non When offense is an of
defined to include more than one means
commission, a spe defendant is entitled to alleging
cific information which of means
committing, offense the the State intends to
prove. State, 622 Ferguson v. S.W.2d 846
(Tex.Crim.App.1981). Since an offer to en in
gage sexual in activity might deviate
clude either oral or anal contact with the
genitals person, of another defendant was quash
entitled to the for information fail specifically
ure to type state which of devi
аte sexual intercourse was offered. Kass Statе, 463, (Tex.Crim.
v. 642 S.W.2d 469-70
App.1981); State, v. Jackson No. 07-83-0297-CR (Tex. App.—A arillo, 10, January m 1985) denied, (not pet. yet published); Con
tra, State, 137, Lozano v. 650 S.W.2d 138 (Tex.App. 1983, no [14th Dist.] — Houston
pet.).
The decision of the court trial is reversed
and the information is dismissed.
DIAL, Justice, dissenting.
I opinion dissent the majority to for the State,
reasons stated in Lozano v. 650 137,
S.W.2d 138 (Tex.App. [14th — Houston 1983, State, pet.) no and Dismore v. Dist.] 1983,
658 (Tex.App. S.W.2d 684 Paso — El pet.). no
DORCHESTER DEVELOPMENT
CORP., Appellant,
v. CO., Appellee.
SAFECO INSURANCE
No. 05-86-01003-CV. Texas, Appeals
Court of of
Dallas. 4,
Aug. 1987.