With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". causing his death. Appellant then returned to his own vehicle and drove away at high speed. After an intense search of the area in and around Paris, appellant was apprehended by the authorities and later indicted for the capital murder of Officer Roberts. V.T. C.A., Penal Code § 19.03(a)(1). After a jury found him guilty of capital murder and returned affirmative answers to the special issues submitted pursuant to Art. 37.071(b), V.A.C.C.P., appellant was sentenced to death. See Art. 37.071(e), V.A.C.C.P. His appeal to this Court is automatic. See Art. 37.071(h), V.A.C.C.P.; Tex.R.App.Proc., rule 40(b)(1). Appellant neither challenges the sufficiency of the evidence on guilt nor the jury’s affirmative answers to the special issues. I. The indictment in this cause charged appella .1982) (<HOLDING>). Indeed, as a general rule it is not

A: holding that conjunction of culpable mental states in jury charge requires jury to find both
B: holding that to find negligence jury need not find violation of federal motorcarrier regulation
C: holding that whether a jury charge comments on weight of evidence is determined by looking at the jury charge as a whole not isolated statements
D: holding district court could not declare jury advisory in action triable of right by a jury and even if no right to jury trial existed in case it would be abuse of discretion to declare jury advisory after both sides rested but before jury was instructed
A.