NO. 07-05-0091-CR
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
AT AMARILLO
PANEL D
APRIL 10, 2006
______________________________
BRUCE D. CARRINGTON,
Appellant
v.
THE STATE OF TEXAS,
Appellee
_________________________________
FROM THE 364TH DISTRICT COURT OF LUBBOCK COUNTY;
NO. 2003-402,456; HON. BRAD UNDERWOOD, PRESIDING
_______________________________
Memorandum Opinion
_______________________________
Before QUINN, C.J., and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.
Through one point of error, Bruce D. Carrington (appellant) contends that his
conviction for aggravated robbery should be reversed and remanded for a new punishment
hearing. This is required due to the purported failure of the State to provide adequate
pretrial notice of its intent to use a prior felony conviction to enhance punishment.
According to the record, written notice was given appellant on the Friday preceding
commencement of trial on Monday. Yet, trial did not actually begin until Wednesday.
Nevertheless, when the State attempted to broach the matter at trial and appellant objected
to its use, the trial court asked if appellant desired a continuance. He said that he did not
because he knew of it; instead, he requested that the State simply be prevented from
utilizing the conviction to enhance punishment. Given these circumstances, any purported
error in the State notifying appellant at the time it did was harmless. Hackett v. State, 160
S.W.3d 588, 591 (Tex. App.–Waco 2005, pet. ref’d) (the error was rendered harmless when
appellant failed to seek a continuance). Accordingly, we overrule the point and affirm the
judgment of the trial court.
Brian Quinn
Chief Justice
Do not publish.
2