Vanderburg v. State

Apr 20, 1994
218-93
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Per Curiam

OPINION ON THE STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of criminal trespass and the trial ‍​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‍court sentenced him to thirty days confinement in the county jail. The Court of Appeals reversed the conviction and rendered a judgment of acquittal. Vanderburg v. State, 843 S.W.2d 286 (Tex.App.1992). The State filed a petition for discretionary review alleging that the ‍​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‍Court of Appeals erred in holding proof of a greater right of possession in the complainant is not sufficient to support a conviction for criminal trespass.

The facts of this case are almost identical to those in our recent ‍​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‍opinion of Arnold v. State, 867 S.W.2d 378 (Tex.Cr.App.1993), in which this Court held that “in criminal trespass cases where the State alleges ownership . . . the State may establish ownership by proving, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the complainant had a ‍​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‍greater right to possession of the property than the defendant.” Id. at 379. See also, Langston v. State, 855 S.W.2d 718, 721 at n. 7 (Tex.Cr.App.1993).

The Court of Appeals did not have the benefit of our recent opinion in Arnold. Therefore, the judgment of ‍​​​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌‌​‌‌‌‌‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​‌​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​​‌​​​​‌‌​​​​‌‌​​‌​​​‌‍the Court of Appeals is summarily reversed and the case is remanded to that court for reconsideration in light of Arnold.