explaining that, under the Model Penal Code, a mistake need not be “reasonable” and no special jury instruction need be given because the ignorance or mistake simply negates a required culpable mental state; “The Model Penal Code commentary viewed ‘mistake of fact’ as being a mere evidentiary issue”
How later courts described this case
- explaining that, under the Model Penal Code, a mistake need not be “reasonable” and no special jury instruction need be given because the ignorance or mistake simply negates a required culpable mental state; “The Model Penal Code commentary viewed ‘mistake of fact’ as being a mere evidentiary issue”
- recognizing that a “mistake must be reasonable for it to constitute a circumstance that exculpates the defendant of the offense charged”
- holding that “an 6 instruction on mistake of fact is limited to any culpable mental state required for the offense.”
- recognizing that courts interpret statutory language according to its plain meaning
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
WOMACK, J.,
concurring.
I join the judgment of the Court and all but Part II. C. of its opinion, which follows a decision on error preservation in Posey v. State, 966 S.W.2d 57, 62 (Tex.Cr.App.1998), that I continue to believe was incorrect. See id., at 66 (Womack, J., concurring).