From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lampkin v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, Panel No. 2
Nov 12, 1980
607 S.W.2d 550 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)

Summary

holding that it is reversible error, even without objection at trial, when the jury charge allows the jury to convict the defendant on a different theory than what was alleged in the indictment

Summary of this case from Reed v. State

Opinion

No. 59518.

November 12, 1980.

Appeal from the 209th Judicial District Court, Harris County, Frank C. Price, J.

Leonard M. Roth, Houston, for appellant.

Carol S. Vance, Dist. Atty., Alvin M. Titus, and John Holleman, Asst. Dist. Attys., Houston, Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before DALLY, W. C. DAVIS and CLINTON, JJ.


OPINION


This is an appeal from a conviction for aggravated robbery in which the jury assessed appellant's punishment at fifteen years confinement.

The indictment returned against appellant alleged that he,

"while in the course of committing theft of two rings and one necklace owned by Patricia Ellis . . ., and with intent to obtain and maintain control of the property, intentionally and knowingly caused serious bodily injury to the complainant."

However, in addition to the means of committing robbery as it was alleged in the indictment, the court's charge authorized appellant's conviction if the jury found he "recklessly" caused bodily injury or "threatened or placed said owner in fear of imminent bodily injury or death."

The indictment only alleges the offense under the provisions of V.T.C.A. Penal Code, §§ 29.02(a)(1) and 29.03(a)(1), but the court's charge, in addition to allowing a conviction under these provisions, instructs the jury that it may find the appellant guilty under the provisions of §§ 29.02(a)(2) and 29.03(a) (1), supra.

V.T.C.A. Penal Code, § 29.02 reads as follows:

"(a) A person commits an offense if, in the course of committing theft as defined in Chapter 31 of this code and with intent to obtain and maintain control of the property, he:

(1) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly causes bodily injury to another; or

(2) intentionally or knowingly threatens or places another in fear of imminent bodily injury or death."

Section 29.03, supra, provides:

"(a) A person commits an offense if he commits robbery as defined in Section 29.02 of this code, and he:

(1) causes serious bodily injury to another; or

(2) uses or exhibits a deadly weapon."

A charge such as that submitted to the jury in this case has been held to constitute reversible error by a majority of this Court even though appellant voiced no objection to it at trial. See Brown v. State, 595 S.W.2d 550 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980); Cullum v. State, 576 S.W.2d 87 (Tex.Cr.App. 1979); Gooden v. State, 576 S.W.2d 382 (Tex.Cr.App. 1979) (on motion for rehearing); Todd v. State, 576 S.W.2d 636 (Tex.Cr.App. 1979); Clements v. State, 576 S.W.2d 390 (Tex.Cr.App. 1979).

For the error in this regard, the judgment must be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

It is so ordered.


Summaries of

Lampkin v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, Panel No. 2
Nov 12, 1980
607 S.W.2d 550 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)

holding that it is reversible error, even without objection at trial, when the jury charge allows the jury to convict the defendant on a different theory than what was alleged in the indictment

Summary of this case from Reed v. State

holding it is reversible error, even without objection at trial, when the jury charge allows the jury to convict the defendant on a different theory than what was alleged in the indictment

Summary of this case from Castillo-Ramirez v. State

In Lampkin v. State, 607 S.W.2d 550 (Tex.Crim.App. 1980), the indictment charged the defendant with intentionally and knowingly causing serious bodily injury.

Summary of this case from Reed v. State

In Lampkin v. State, 607 S.W.2d 550 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980), it was held that the court's charge was fundamentally defective, inter alia, in authorizing the jury to convict upon proof that the defendant "knowingly, intentionally, or recklessly" caused serious bodily injury to the complainant, when the indictment had alleged only that the injury was committed "intentionally and knowingly."

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

Lampkin v. State

Case Details

Full title:Freo LAMPKIN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, Panel No. 2

Date published: Nov 12, 1980

Citations

607 S.W.2d 550 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980)

Citing Cases

Wilson v. State

Obviously, the indictment alleged the commission of robbery under V.T.C.A., Penal Code, § 29.02(a)(1), which…

Reed v. State

Based on the foregoing, we conclude that the jury charge affected the very basis of the case; thus, we hold…