Rodney Allen Boortz v. State

COURT OF APPEALS
SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS
FORT WORTH
NO. 02-11-00193-CR
RODNEY ALLEN BOORTZ APPELLANT
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE
----------
FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY
----------
MEMORANDUM OPINION1
----------
A jury convicted Appellant Rodney Allen Boortz of aggravated assault with
a deadly weapon and unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon and assessed
his punishment at fifteen years’ confinement for the aggravated assault and ten
years’ confinement for unlawful possession of a firearm by a felon. The trial court
sentenced him accordingly and ordered the sentences to be served concurrently.
Appellant brings a single point on appeal complaining of charge error.
1
See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
At trial, Appellant objected to the proposed jury charge. After changes
were made, the trial court asked if the parties requested any other changes to the
charge. Appellant’s counsel stated, “[I]t looks like the charge reflects those
changes that I requested.”
A party may not complain on appeal that he was given the jury charge he
requested.2 The invited error rule prohibits a party from succeeding in having a
claimed jury charge error reviewed by a higher court in hopes of reversal when
(1) that party requested the jury charge, and the charge was given or (2) the
party affirmatively and successfully argued that the trial court include or exclude
a portion of the charge.3
We therefore overrule Appellant’s sole point and affirm the trial court’s
judgment.
LEE ANN DAUPHINOT
JUSTICE
PANEL: DAUPHINOT, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ.
DO NOT PUBLISH
Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
DELIVERED: March 15, 2012
2
Prystash v. State, 3 S.W.3d 522, 531 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999), cert. denied,
529 U.S. 1102 (2000).
3
Wileford v. State, 72 S.W.3d 820, 823 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2002, pet.
ref’d).
2