History
  • No items yet
midpage
Video News, Inc. v. State
786 S.W.2d 356
| Tex. Crim. App. | 1990
|
Check Treatment

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITIONS FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

Appellant pled nolo contendere and was convicted by the trial court of possession of ¿obscene material. A fine of $1,000 was assessed in each of the eleven cases. Appellant’s convictions were affirmed. Video News, Inc. v. State, 781 S.W.2d 411 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st], 1989).

Appellant raises one ground for review. We agree with the Court of Appeals that this ground does not mandate reversal. However, as is true in every case where discretionary review is refused, this refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning or language employed by the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

*357With this understanding, we refuse appellant’s petition for discretionary review.

CLINTON, J., would grant.

Case Details

Case Name: Video News, Inc. v. State
Court Name: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Date Published: Mar 7, 1990
Citation: 786 S.W.2d 356
Docket Number: Nos. 1600-89 to 1610-89
Court Abbreviation: Tex. Crim. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.