Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

738 S.W.2d 287

Gersh v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 14, 1987

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1987-10-14

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“the presumption provided in the text (sic) Penal Code Annotated Section 28.03 (Vernon Supp. 1986) was unconstitutionally applied in this case.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Green v. State

“[w]e believe that [the Court of Appeals] reached the correct result for the correct reasons.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including Green v. State

Relies on Sheffield v. State · Gersh v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1987-10-14

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2012

9 state decisions

501987199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

MILLER, Judge.

¶2Appellant was convicted by a jury of criminal mischief. Punishment was assessed by the trial court at a fine of $200.00. On appeal the Dallas Court of Appeals reversed and remanded the conviction. Gersh v. State, 714 S.W.2d 80 (Tex.App.-Dallas, 1986).

¶3The State raises one ground of review complaining that the Court of Appeals incorrectly held that the presumption provided in the text Penal Code Annotated Section 28.03 (Vernon Supp.1986) was unconstitutionally applied in this case. The State’s petition for discretionary review will be refused.

¶4As is true in every case where discretionary review is summarily refused, such refusal does not constitute endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

¶5In this case, however, we have reviewed the record and agree with the Court of Appeals opinion. We believe that they reached the correct result for the correct reasons in deciding this issue.

¶6With this understanding, we refuse the State’s petition for discretionary review.

ONION, P.J., and McCORMICK, J., not participating.
/738/sw2d/287 · .json · Public domain