Hicks v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this CaseAppellant Narada Hicks was charged with intentional or knowing aggravated assault after he and Angelo Jackson got into a fight over borrowed shoes that ended with Angelo being shot in the leg. The trial judge instructed the jury on "intentional" or "knowing" aggravated assault, as charged in the indictment, and he also gave a separate instruction for reckless aggravated assault. The jury convicted appellant of reckless aggravated assault. The court of appeals held that the trial judge erred in giving any instruction on reckless aggravated assault because: (1) the original indictment did not charge a reckless state of mind, and (2) reckless aggravated assault is not a lesser-included offense of intentional aggravated assault. The Court of Criminal Appeals granted review to resolve a conflict between the courts of appeals on whether "reckless aggravated assault" is a lesser-included offense of intentional or knowing aggravated assault. Applying the plain language of Article 37.09 and adhering to the Court's opinion in "Rocha v. State," the Court concluded that it is. Therefore, the trial judge did not err by instructing the jury on reckless aggravated assault as a lesser-included offense.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.