# Seiffert v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · November 14, 1973 · 501 S.W.2d 124

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683591

## Case

- **Full name:** Louis L. SEIFFERT, Jr., Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** November 14, 1973
- **Citations:** 501 S.W.2d 124; 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2255
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Morrison
- **Judges:** Keith, Douglas, Morrison
- **Cited by:** 31 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683591

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding State must prove allegations in indictment beyond reasonable doubt

## Opinion text

MORRISON, Judge
(dissenting).
I cannot bring myself to agree that this Court should consider as authoritative the opinion by the Supreme Court of this State in Goldstein v. Union National Bank, supra. The opinion from which the majority quotes was prepared by Judge William E. Hawkins, but voiced his opinion only. Judge Greenwood concurred on grounds other than the cited language. Chief Justice Nelson Phillips dissented. Since there is no precedent which I consider authoritative to the contrary, I agree with that portion of Judge Douglas’ opinion in which he says:
“I construe Article 342-507, supra, to apply in this situation where an excessive • loan was in fact made to one borrower.”
Having reached this conclusion, I join in Judge Douglas’ dissent.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9683591. Public record. Not legal advice.