Second Court of Appeals | Case Summaries

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of January 19, 2009

NOTE: Summaries are prepared by the court's staff attorneys and law clerks for public information only and reflect his or her interpretation alone of the facts and legal issues. The summaries are not part of the court's opinion in the case and should not be cited to, quoted, or relied upon as the opinion of the court.

Links to full text of opinions (PDF version) can be accessed by clicking the cause number.

Wingfield v. State, No. 02-07-00399-CR (Jan. 22, 2009) (McCoy, J., joined by Livingston, J.; Dauphinot, J., dissents with opinion). [Note: Both opinions are at the same link in one document.]: Held: Because the evidence was sufficient to support a finding that an assault occurred inside the house and because Appellant did not challenge the assault that occurred outside the house, the two assaults supported Appellant's convictions for burglary of a habitation and aggravated assault; therefore, Appellant's right to be free from double jeopardy was not violated. Furthermore, the evidence was legally sufficient to support the jury's finding that a kitchen knife constituted a deadly weapon.; Dissent: There was only one assault. It began inside the house and ended outside. Because there was only one assault, the convictions for burglary of a habitation and aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, both based on the one assault, violate Appellant's right to be free from double jeopardy. The conviction for the most serious offense, aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, should be retained, and the conviction for burglary of a habitation should be vacated.