holding that a juror is biased as a matter of law if he unequivocally expresses an inability to consider five years probation as possible punishment for the lesser-included State’s Brief Page 4 offense of murder in a capital-murder trial
How later courts described this case
- holding that a juror is biased as a matter of law if he unequivocally expresses an inability to consider five years probation as possible punishment for the lesser-included State’s Brief Page 4 offense of murder in a capital-murder trial
- noting that appellate courts look beyond individual statements in isolation when reviewing determination of bias
- evidence of defendant's low I.Q., though relevant to special issues, did not preclude jury from finding that he acted deliberately or from making an affirmative finding of future dangerousness
- ÂUnder Batson, the totality of the circumstances of the particular case must be examined to determine whether an inference of misconduct by the state has been established.Â
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
OPINION ON APPELLANT’S MOTION FOR REHEARING
PER CURIAM.
We granted rehearing in this cause to reexamine our conclusion on original submission that appellant waived Batson error by failing to object in the trial court. Bat-son v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 , 106 S.Ct. 1712 , 90 L.Ed.2d 69 (1986). In his motion, appellant again requests this Court to allow him to raise Batson error for the first time on appeal.
For reasons given in Mathews v. State, 768 S.W.2d 731 (Tex.Cr.App.1989, decided this day), disposition of this point of error on original submission was correct. The ground for rehearing is overruled.
’ MILLER, J., dissents.