stating that defendant’s claim that he was entitled to mitigation instruction or special issue had been rejected by the Supreme court in Jurek v. Texas
How later courts described this case
- stating that defendant’s claim that he was entitled to mitigation instruction or special issue had been rejected by the Supreme court in Jurek v. Texas
- reasoning that written consent Atends to show that [the defendant=s] consent was definite and unequivocal@
- reasoning that written consent “tends to show that [the defendant’s] consent was definite and unequivocal”
- stating that absence of violence and physical coercion is indicative that consent was given voluntarily
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
TOM G. DAVIS, Judge,
concurring.
While I cannot join that portion of the opinion which holds that the issue of volun-tariness of Carol Johnson’s consent to search was not preserved for review, I agree that the evidence supports the conclusion that Johnson voluntarily consented to the search.
ONION, P. J., joins in this opinion.