stating that “this court is without authority to either pass sentence or reduce the Hartfield–Page 8 punishment assessed by a jury. And, while we may remand solely on the issue of punishment where punishment was originally assessed by the court, we may not do so where punishment was assessed by the jury.”
How later courts described this case
- stating that “this court is without authority to either pass sentence or reduce the Hartfield–Page 8 punishment assessed by a jury. And, while we may remand solely on the issue of punishment where punishment was originally assessed by the court, we may not do so where punishment was assessed by the jury.”
- stating that “this court is without authority to either pass sentence or reduce the punishment assessed by a jury. And, while we may remand solely on the issue of punishment where punishment was originally assessed by the court, we may not do so where punishment was assessed by the jury.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
ONION, Presiding Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the results reached, but cannot agree that if commutation had been granted after the death penalty had been set aside by the United States Supreme Court, a different result would be reached. See this writer’s dissent in Whan v. State, 485 S.W.2d 275 (Tex.Cr.App. 1972).