Opinion

Bennett v. State

742 S.W.2d 664
1987 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 669
1987 WL 998

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed: Oct 21, 1987
Status: Published
Author: Teague
On the bench: Miller, Teague, Clinton, Duncan, Grigson
Cited by: 34 cases

Vacated on other grounds by Bennett v. Texas, 486 U.S. 1051 (1988)

appointment of psychiatrist to examine defendant solely for the purpose of determining future dangerousness[

How later courts described this case

appointment of psychiatrist to examine defendant solely for the purpose of determining future dangerousness[

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

TEAGUE, J.,

dissents, and especially dissents to the total disposition of points of error numbered 1-5, inclusive, and to most of the reasoning that is used to overrule the other points of error.

CLINTON, and DUNCAN, JJ., dissent to holding that admitting testimony of Dr. Grigson is harmless error.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.