With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". to a particular cause, a broad scope of review and revision has been asserted by the appellate courts of this state — one that is still recognized, acknowledged and confirmed by the Legislature. Id.; see also Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 44.25 (Vernon Supp. 20[ ]05). In accord with Carter are Lopez v. State, 708 S.W.2d 446, 448-49 (Tex.Crim.App.1986); Barney v. State, 698 S.W.2d 114, 123 (Tex.Crim.App.1985); Hall v. State, 86 S.W.3d 235, 239 (Tex.App.-Austin 2002, pet. ref'd); Frost v. State, 25 S.W.3d 395, 399 (Tex.App.Austin 2000, no pet.); Rodriguez v. State, 939 S.W.2d 211, 219-20 (Tex.App.Austin 1997, no pet.); State v. Lara, 924 S.W.2d 198, 201 n. 3 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1996, no pet.); and Garza v. State, 676 S.W.2d 185, 187 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 1984, pet. ref'd) (<HOLDING>). I would abate the appeal and ask both the

A: recognizing the open question
B: holding it is a wellestablished rule that grounds of error not asserted by points of error or argument in the court of appeals are waived
C: holding that the authority of a court of appeals to consider unassigned error in criminal cases is not open to question
D: holding that a ruling of the trial court to which no error has been assigned becomes the law of the case and is not subject to review by the court of appeals
C.