Judge Douglas’ dissent on Motion for Rehearing
How later courts described this case
- Judge Douglas’ dissent on Motion for Rehearing
- testimony about man's reputation for being good husband and father does not open door to questions regarding violence toward others
- on Motion for Rehearing, Douglas, J., dissenting
- Opinion on State's motion for rehearing
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
DALLY, Judge,
dissenting.
Childs v. State, 491 S.W.2d 907 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Salazar v. State, 494 S.W.2d 548 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Navajar v. State, 496 S.W.2d 61 (Tex.Cr.App.1973); Howard v. State, 505 S.W.2d 306 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Partida v. State, 506 S.W.2d 209 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Hurd v. State, 513 S.W.2d 936 (Tex.Cr.App.1924); Mitchell v. State, 517 S.W.2d 282 (Tex.Cr.App.1975) and other cases cannot be distinguished from this case. If they were correctly decided the same rule should be applied to this case and it should also be affirmed. This is especially so when the appellant admits in his brief that the testimony of his wife put his reputation in issue. I dissent.