In Randle v. State, 697 S.W.2d 13 (Tex. App.--Houston [14th Dist.] 1985, no pet.), the defendant complained that his conviction for capital murder, i.e., murder in the course of aggravated robbery, was invalid because the aggravated robbery involved the same assault which caused the death of the victim. Id. at 16. The court appeals rejected appellant's complaint because "the Legislature. . .has found it appropriate to authorize the imposition of the death penalty in cases in which a murder occurs during the commission or attempted commission of a robbery, which might be completed either by assault or by threat. The significant feature of a robbery offense is that the violence or threatened violence occurs during the course of the commission of theft. . .It is this pecuniary motive for robbery-murder that renders it more atrocious. When this legislative purpose is recognized, the fact that robbery and murder might have a shared element becomes irrelevant. Randle, 697 S.W.2d at 16-17. Thus it is clear that, in Randle, the felony underlying the capital murder charge was aggravated robbery, a criminal act separate and apart from the murder itself.