proceeding under article 59.02 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. See Tex.Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 59.02 (Vernon 2006). 2 . Because Universal stands in the shoes of Helfman as its assignee and subrogee, this theory, if correct, would also result in forfeiture of Universal’s superior right to possess the property. 3 .In its first issue, Universal asserts that the trial court proceedings were “unnecessary and improperly instigated by the State.” In its third issue, Universal argues that the trial court’s order granting unconditional ownership to the State violates the United States and Texas Constitutions. 4 . The cases cited by the State do not articulate this rule. See National Safe Deposit Sav. & Trust Co. v. Hibbs, 229 U.S. 391, 396, 33 S.Ct. 818, 57 L.Ed. 1241 (1913) (<HOLDING>); Glasscock v. First Nat'l Bank of San Angelo,
holding that bank was equitably estopped from recovering against stock broker for conversion of stock certificates that were assigned in blank and that broker had sold for a bank employee who misappropriated the stock certificates from the bank recognizing that a bank customer may have a tort claim against a bank for the wrongful dishonor of a check holding successor national bank liable for punitive damages judgment against bank that merged into successor national bank holding that a bank customer did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in records maintained by the bank holding that bank incurred a loss when it made a loan upon the collateral of pledged stock certificates