[Download] "Trace Gene England v. State Texas" by Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas ~ Book PDF Kindle ePub Free
eBook details
- Title: Trace Gene England v. State Texas
- Author : Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- Release Date : January 14, 1994
- Genre: Law,Books,Professional & Technical,
- Pages : * pages
- Size : 82 KB
Description
Opinion ON STATE'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW After a jury trial, appellant was convicted of the offense of delivery
of LSD, and his punishment was assessed at five years confinement and a fine of $10,000. In his sole point of error on appeal
he contended that the trial court erred in allowing admission of evidence of several extraneous offenses, ostensibly to rebut
his defense of entrapment. The court of appeals agreed, and, on authority of this Court's opinion on original submission in
Bush v. State, 611 S.W.2d 428 (Tex.Cr.App. 1980), reversed and remanded for new trial. England v. State, 856 S.W.2d 544 (Tex.App.
- Houston [1st] 1993). The court of appeals held that, because predisposition is not an issue in the defense of entrapment
under V.T.C.A. Penal Code, § 8.06, evidence of extraneous misconduct is not admissible in the guise of rebuttal evidence. One justice dissented, arguing that the extraneous misconduct admitted in this case involved other, earlier transactions
between appellant and the police agent he contended entrapped him, and were admissible to show the agent did not "induce"
appellant, as required to establish entrapment under § 8.06, supra, but merely provided him an opportunity to commit the crime.
The courts of appeals have split on this issue. Compare Houston v. State, 735 S.W.2d 903, at 905 (Tex.App. Houston [14th]
1987, pet. ref'd) and Gilliam v. State, 749 S.W.2d 582, at 583 (Tex.App. - Eastland 1988, no pet.). We granted the State's
petition for discretionary review in order to address the question of the admissibility of extraneous misconduct evidence
to rebut the defense of entrapment. Tex.R.App.Pro., Rule 200(c)(1), (2) & (5).