Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Defendant's motion for new trial was sufficient under Rule 33.1 to preserve for appellate consideration his "unconstitutionally vague as applied" challenge to the telephone harassment statute, Texas Penal Code section 42.07(a)(4), and the court of appeals erred in holding otherwise.

Appellate Information

• Decided 09/27/2006
• Published 09/27/2006

Judges

• HOLCOMB, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which KELLER, P.J., and MEYERS, PRICE, WOMACK, JOHNSON, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.

Court

• Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Keith Hampton, Austin, for Appellant., Brandon Dakroub, Assistant County Atty., Georgetown, Matthew Paul, State's Atty., Austin, for State.