holding that unlawful possession of a firearm is a status crime, and Applicant was not entitled to relief even though the predicate felony supporting his conviction had been set aside and the charge dismissed
How later courts described this case
- holding that unlawful possession of a firearm is a status crime, and Applicant was not entitled to relief even though the predicate felony supporting his conviction had been set aside and the charge dismissed
- finding that subsequent reversal and dismissal of predicate felony did not render void an otherwise valid conviction for possession of firearm by a felon
- holding that the State must prove the elements of an offense as they existed at the time the defendant is charged with having committed that crime
- noting that, at trial, 13 “[t]he State proved Applicant was a felon by introducing proof of Applicant’s prior felony conviction for rape of a child”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MEYERS, J.,
dissenting.
I agree with the majority that Applicant is not entitled to relief based on his conviction being void since he had the status of a felon when he was arrested. However, the facts of this case fit the criteria for an actual innocence claim under our opinion in Ex Parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). It is possible that if a new jury saw the newly discovered evidence, they would not have convicted Applicant. I would grant relief because the underlying felony conviction used to support his conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon was set aside. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.