Yarbough v. State

Nov 9, 1988
No. 817-87
Reporters:
, ,

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appeal is taken from a conviction for the offense of aggravated sexual ‍​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​‍assault. After finding appellant guilty, the jury assessed punishment, enhanced by one prior conviction, of life in the Texas Department of Corrections and a $10,000 fine.

On direct appeal, Appellant argued the trial court erred in instructing ‍​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​‍the jury on the law concerning good time and parole, inasmuch as the charge is predicated upon an unconstitutional statute. The Court of Appeals rejected appellant’s challenge to Article 37.07, § 4, V.A.C.C.P. in a published opinion Yarbough ‍​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​‍v. State, 732 S.W.2d 86 (Tex.App.—Dallas [5th] 1987).

In his petition for discretionary review, Appellant urges the Court of appeals erred in holding Article 37.07, § 4, supra, is constitutional. We find appellant is correct.

In Rose v. State, 752 S.W.2d 529 (Tex.Cr.App. 1988), ‍​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​‍this Court determined that Article 37.07, § 4, is unconstitutional. Under Rose, supra, it is still necessary for the Court of Appeals to conduct a harmless *19error analysis under the guidelines of Tex. R.App.Pro. 81(b)(2).

The judgment of the Court of ‍​‌​​‌​​‌​‌‌​‌​​‌‌​​‌​‌​‌‌​​‌​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​‌​​​‌‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​‌​‌‌​‌​‌​‌​​​‌​​‌​‌‌​​‌‌​​‌‌‌​​‌‌‌‌​​‍Appeals is vacated and this case is remanded to that Court for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.