Opinion

Grimes v. State

  • 807 S.W.2d 582
  • 1991 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 63
  • 1991 WL 40682
Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Filed
Mar 27, 1991
Status
Published
Author
Miller
On the bench
McCormick, Miller, Baird, Clinton
Cited by
117 cases

holding that the legislature’s enactment of Code of Criminal Procedure Article 44.29(b), which changed the law so that reversible error during the punishment phase of a trial would result only in a new punishment hearing rather than a completely new trial, did not constitute an ex post facto violation under either federal or Texas constitutions

How later courts described this case

  • holding that the legislature’s enactment of Code of Criminal Procedure Article 44.29(b), which changed the law so that reversible error during the punishment phase of a trial would result only in a new punishment hearing rather than a completely new trial, did not constitute an ex post facto violation under either federal or Texas constitutions
  • holding that the legislature’s enactment of Code of Criminal Procedure Article 44.29(b
  • assuming without deciding that article I, section 16's proscription against retroactive legislation applies to criminal cases, the court of criminal appeals held "the State's constitutional prohibition against retroactive legislation is not violated by Article 6 44.29(b)'s application in the trial court to cases which hue [sic] been reversed on appeal for errors committed only in the punishment phase of trial"
  • discussing difference between prohibition against ex-post-facto law and prohibition against retroactive law and assuming for sake of argument that “proscription- against retroactive legislation is applicable to criminal cases”

Written by the judges who cited it.

The opinion

MILLER, Judge,

concurring.

Although I am in sympathy with much that Judge Baird’s dissent says about the proper interpretation of Tex. Const, art I, Sec. 16, the nature of what I and the majority opinion perceive to be a substantial right in Texas criminal jurisprudence compels the conclusion that the statutory “right” under former Art. 44.29, V.A.C. C.P., to have the error free guilt stage of a trial relitigated because of an error in the punishment phase, is not substantial. Opinion at pages 587 and 588.

Thus I concur in the result reached by the majority.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.