Herbert Hubert Cooper, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court held that when a theft follows an assault immediately, the assault is deemed to have been committed in the course of the theft, and that evidence of an alternative motive does not defeat the inference of intent; thus the trial court's robbery conviction was affirmed. Justice Meyers dissented, arguing that immediacy alone is insufficient, while Justice Keasler concurred, emphasizing the inference of intent from the sequence of events.