# Butler v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · March 9, 1994 · 872 S.W.2d 227

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9768552

## Case

- **Full name:** Steven Anthony BUTLER, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** March 9, 1994
- **Citations:** 872 S.W.2d 227; 1994 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 30; 1994 WL 68878
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Maloney
- **Judges:** White, Maloney, Clinton, McCormick, Baird
- **Cited by:** 237 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9768552

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that defense counsel reasonably accepted venire person who stated that the perpetrators of a violent crime against a family friend should have received the death penalty, because venire person’s other statements showed her to be fair and open-minded and willing to set …
- concluding that the autopsy report prepared by one medical examiner was admissible as a business record based on the authenticating-witness testimony of a different medical examiner in the same office
- holding that sentencing scheme that permits jury consideration of unadjudicated offenses, which differs from punishment scheme in non-capital cases, does not violate equal protection clause
- holding that an objection that a witness was testifying from an autopsy report he did not author was not sufficiently specific to preserve a hearsay complaint for appellate review
- explaining that before the requested instruction under article 38.22, section 7, is required, some evidence must be presented to the jury raising the issue of voluntariness

## Opinion text

MALONEY, J.,
concurs with note. Assuming under Garcia v. State, 868 S.W.2d 337 (Tex.Crim.App.1993), the Medical Examiner’s autopsy report is not precluded from introduction under Tex.R.Crim.Evid. 803(8)(B) (law enforcement preclusion) and the facts of the report are admissible, it does not follow that the conclusions of that report over a hearsay objection are admissible. See United States v. Rosa, 11 F.3d 315 (2nd Cir.1993) (discussing United States v. Oates, 560 F.2d 45 (2nd Cir.1977), upon which we based our decision in Cole v. State, 839 S.W.2d 798 (Tex.Crim.App.1992)); Tex. R.Crim.Evid. 803(8)(B) (“matters observed” by non-law enforcement personnel admissible); Tex.R.Crim.Evid. 803(8)(C) (“factual findings” against the state admissible). However, given the absence of a specific objection, I concur in the result.
McCORMICK, P.J., and BAIRD, J., not participating.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9768552. Public record. Not legal advice.