Skip to main content

Burks v. State

Citations

  • 693 S.W.2d 932
  • 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1418

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding circumstantial evidence was sufficient to support conviction for forgery by possession
  • noting that section 32.21(a)(1) of forgery statute consolidated various forgery statutes and now prohibits “three kinds of criminal acts . . . (1) making or altering, (2) passing or uttering[,] or (3) possessing with intent to utter”
  • setting out the elements of “forgery by possession with intent to utter are (1) a person (2) ‘forges’ (3) a writing (4) within intent to defraud or harm (5) another.”
  • setting out the elements of \forgery by possession with intent to utter are (1) a person (2) 'forges' (3) a writing (4) within intent to defraud or harm (5) another.\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Onion, Teague, Clinton

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

33 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

22 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.