stating that appellant who did not address the question of whether the alleged error by the trial court in failing to include a jury instruction regarding the voluntariness of his statement to police was harmless constituted inadequate briefing under rule 38.1(i) and waived the issue for appellate review
How later courts described this case
- stating that appellant who did not address the question of whether the alleged error by the trial court in failing to include a jury instruction regarding the voluntariness of his statement to police was harmless constituted inadequate briefing under rule 38.1(i) and waived the issue for appellate review
- holding that defendant’s points of error were inadequately briefed “by neglecting to present argument and authorities” in support of them
- concluding that the appellant inadequately briefed his points by not addressing with argument and authorities the question of whether the alleged error of failing to include an instruction in the jury charge was harmless
- holding that defense counsel did not err in accepting venire person who knew potential witness in the case but who also stated that she could evaluate the evidence fairly and impartially evaluate that witness’s testimony
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WOMACK, J.,
concurring.
I join the judgment of the court. I do not agree that the appellant’s fifth point of error was inadequately briefed, see ante at 2 n. 2. I would hold that the appellant’s challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, as a matter of fact, has no merit.