“We fail to see how time is saved by permitting inquiries as to prior jury service, which court, what offense, and when, but not permitting the question as to the verdict.”
How later courts described this case
- “We fail to see how time is saved by permitting inquiries as to prior jury service, which court, what offense, and when, but not permitting the question as to the verdict.”
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TEAGUE, Judge,
dissenting.
Because I find that Justice Cantu of the San Antonio Court of Appeals has eloquently put in the stately dissenting opinion he filed in Espinosa v. State, 653 S.W.2d 446, 450 (Tex.App. — San Antonio 1983), in which Chief Justice Cadena of that Court joined, all that I would like to say, as to the majority opinion of this Court not giving due consideration to the express declaration of policy underlying the purposes of the “Texas Open Records Act,” Art. 6252-17a, V.A.C.S., I will adopt his opinion in toto as my dissenting opinion, and will say no more.