OPINION
UTTER, Justice.
In a jury trial, appellant was convicted of aggravated robbery; punishment was assessed by the court at twenty-five years imprisonment. The sufficiency of the evidence to support the conviction is not challenged. We affirm.
In his first ground of error appellant contends that the charging portion of his indictment was fundamentally void because it substituted the word "steal" for the word "appropriate" and thus failed to follow...
Let's get started
Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.
- Updated daily.
- Uncompromising quality.
- Complete, Accurate, Current.