KELLER, P.J., filed a concurring opinion in which KEASLER, HERVEY, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.
The dissenting opinions do a disservice to counsel for appellant, who put forward and ably argued a proposed legal basis for granting relief. The Court's opinion addresses appellant's arguments and explains why they must fail. The dissenters, on the other hand, offer no attempt to defend appellant's actual legal position (or to rebut the Court's rejection of that position), preferring instead to rely upon the persuasive power of catchy phrases. It appears that the dissenters find appellant's legal theory indefensible - their only argument is that it "ought to be" the law. (1)
I join the Court's opinion.
FILED: March 13, 2002
1. Saldano v. State, S.W.3d , (Tex. Crim. App. delivered March 13,
2002)(Price, J., dissenting).
1. Saldano v. State, S.W.3d , (Tex. Crim. App. delivered March 13, 2002)(Price, J., dissenting).