Curry v. State
In Curry v. State, 30 S.W.3d 394, 404 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000) the Court explored what is meant by being "authorized by the indictment."
The Court explained that the "law" as "authorized by the indictment" is the statutory elements of the offense as modified by the charging instrument.
The Court held this phrase to mean that a sufficiency review must encompass "the statutory elements of the offense...as modified by the charging instrument."
When a statute lists more than one method of committing an offense, and the indictment alleges some, but not all, of the statutorily listed methods, the State is limited to the methods alleged. Id. at 404-405.
In Curry, the indictment alleged only one of the two possible ways to "abduct" someone: using or threatening to use deadly force. The State could not expand the bases of the defendant's liability to include the other definition of "abduct" contained in the statute because the indictment limited the State to the version of "abduct" that was alleged.