From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Leno v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Oct 8, 1997
952 S.W.2d 860 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

Summary

ruling that the presumption applies to the failure to include either the juvenile's age or birth date in the juvenile-transfer order

Summary of this case from Light v. State

Opinion

No. 047-97.

October 8, 1997.

Appeal from 54th District Court, McLennan County; George H. Allen, Judge.

John M. Hurley, Waco, for appellant.

Gary Coley, Asst. Dist. Atty., Waco, Matthew Paul, State's Atty., Austin, for State.

Before the court en banc.


OPINION ON APPELLANT'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW


A jury found appellant guilty of aggravated robbery and assessed punishment at confinement for twenty-five years. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction. Leno v. State, 934 S.W.2d 421 (Tex.App. — Waco 1996). We granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to address the Court of Appeals' decision upholding the order transferring appellant to district court to be tried as an adult despite its failure to specifically include appellant's age at the time of the offense or his date of birth.

After further consideration of the petition for discretionary review and the opinion of the Court of Appeals, we have determined that appellant's petition was improvidently granted. Therefore, appellant's petition for discretionary review is dismissed.


Summaries of

Leno v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Oct 8, 1997
952 S.W.2d 860 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

ruling that the presumption applies to the failure to include either the juvenile's age or birth date in the juvenile-transfer order

Summary of this case from Light v. State
Case details for

Leno v. State

Case Details

Full title:Marcus Dewayne LENO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Oct 8, 1997

Citations

952 S.W.2d 860 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)

Citing Cases

Rutzen v. State

Because Appellant's objections made in the trial court do not comport with the argument made on appeal, the…

Pando v. State

Tex.R.App.P. 33.1(a)(1). A motion to suppress based on one legal theory cannot be used to support a different…