An appellate court may not reform a trial court's judgment to reflect a conviction for an unrequested lesser-included offense that was not submitted to the jury, when the appellate court decides that the evidence is insufficient to support the jury's guilty verdict for the greater offense but is sufficient to support a conviction for the lesser-included offense. A court of appeals may reform the judgment to reflect a lesser-included offense only when the jury is instructed on the lesser-included offense or one of the parties asked for but was denied such an instruction. Allowing reformation without requesting a charge or charging the jury would allow the State to rescue a trial strategy that overreaches by obtaining a conviction for the greater offense. Haynes v. State, PD-1923-06 [1].