Skip to main content

Ward v. State

Citations

  • 829 S.W.2d 787
  • 1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 54
  • 1992 WL 50013

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that when indictment is not physically amended on its face, amendment is not effective and original indictment language prevails
  • stating that because the Legislature did not testify regarding the amendment process, we should not \frustrate legislative intent by applying a hypertechnical interpretation to the term.\
  • holding evidence insufficient under indictment when State's attempted amendment to indictment failed
  • remanding with order of acquittal because evidence insufficient to support conviction under original indictment
  • remanding with order of acquittal because evidence insufficient to support conviction under original indictment
  • “Even if the motion sufficiently apprised appellant of the accusation against him, it would be insufficient under state constitutional provisions.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: McCORMICK, Miller, White

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.