Case law

Livingston v. State

542 S.W.2d 655 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 6, 1976

There exists a great deal of divergence of opinion among eminently qualified and learned men of the profession. … [2] Although I agree that such evidence is clearly admissible under Art. 37.071(a), V.A.C.C.P., I cannot agree that its probative value is equally clear.

Garcia v. State

887 S.W.2d 862 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 13, 1994

Rios, the store was well lit, her eye sight was good, and she could see appellant clearly and without obstruction; she remembered particularly his face. … Eduardo Morales took the stand as a State’s witness under a grant of immunity and surprised the State by denying the veracity of his prior incriminatory statements.

Broadnax, James Garfield

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 14, 2011

Challenges for Cause After seven weeks of examining venire members, the trial court qualified 47 from whom to select a jury. … the guilt of an actor, and circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to establish guilt." (85) 2.

Somers v. State

368 S.W.3d 528 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 6, 2012

Legal Framework Rule 702 provides that if scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by … See also Petition of Johnston, 109 Wash.2d 493 , 745 P.2d 864 (1987) (single positive EMIT test result “clearly provides some evidence” of drug use); Wykoff v.

Hardman v. State

614 S.W.2d 123 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 18, 1981

With regard to the admissibility of that record, it was not self-proving in terms of the predicate which should be established for its introduction into evidence. … Presumably the testimony contemplated by Sec. 3 should be given by the "entrant, custodian or other qualified witness" mentioned in Sec. 2.

Busby v. State

990 S.W.2d 263 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 31, 1999

We held that the affidavits *267 served to establish that factual dispute despite the fact that the affidavits were later contradicted by the affiants on the witness stand. Id. … Mayberry clearly had satisfactory proof that appellant had committed a felony and had already fled the scene of the crime. That evidence, in turn, was satisfactory proof that appellant was about to escape.

Broadnax, James Garfield

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 14, 2011

Challenges for Cause After seven weeks of examining venire members, the trial court qualified 47 from whom to select a jury. … They are gruesome, clearly, but they portray no more than the gruesomeness of the injuries inflicted by the suspect.

Lemons v. State

59 Tex. Crim. 299 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 9, 1910

We think this testimony was clearly admissible as part of the res gestae. 9. Appellant’s fourth bill of exceptions is to the action of the court in not allowing appellant to prove by the witness Dr. … The court qualifies this bill as follows: “This bill is approved with the explanation that the witness had already testified for the defendant fully as to all inquiries and no pertinent legitimate question was asked the witness

Martinez v. State

879 S.W.2d 54 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 8, 1994

Crim.App.1991) ("if the meaning of the statutory text, when read using the established canons of construction relating to such text, should have been plain to the legislators who voted on it, we ordinarily give effect to … Nevertheless, I am prepared to accept that the clause does indeed qualify all three offenses.

Smith v. State

541 S.W.2d 831 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 20, 1976

Clearly, the prosecutor erred in failing to correct the erroneous impression made by Lonnie Williams in his testimony at the guilt or innocence stage of the trial. As in Buckhalter v. … Burkhalter and his counsel knew that an attorney not connected with the case offered to get Whitehurst immunity if he would testify for the State.

Werner v. State

711 S.W.2d 639 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 9, 1986

It did not establish that appellant did in fact act under the influence of the Holocaust on the night of the offense. See and cf. Wagner v. … Because the majority opinion's interpretation of V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 19.06, is clearly and totally erroneous, I dissent.

Robbins, Ex Parte Neal Hampton

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 29, 2011

Yet its accuracy is clearly open to dispute. … Wheeler is highly qualified, his testimony adds "very little to this case. . . .

State of Texas v. Duran, Anthony

396 S.W.3d 563 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 17, 2013

Davis concluded that “the officer’s action clearly shows that the decision [to stop Mr. Duran] was made when he made the turn behind the defendant.” … The State appealed, arguing that, because the DVD “clearly shows” that Mr.

Draughon v. State

831 S.W.2d 331 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 13, 1992

The parties may also exclude a limited number of qualified veniremembers for idiosyncratic reasons. 2 Art. 35.15, V.A.C.C.P. … Here, Appellant merely contends that the testimony should have been disallowed because possession of a woman’s stocking does not in itself constitute a crime, nor does it definitely establish that he was preparing to commit

Pace v. State

58 Tex. Crim. 90 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 26, 1910

The bill is qualified by the Judge as follows: “This bill is all right as far as it goes, but it does not go far enough to make it a fair bill. … This charge is in our judgment clearly erroneous.

Davis v. State

313 S.W.3d 317 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 16, 2010

Appellant argues that the State did not establish with any degree of specificity how the doctors were qualified to testify as to their opinions regarding appellant’s future dangerousness and failed to carry its burden of … He acknowledges this right as qualified by the requirement that the evidence be relevant and not excluded by an established evidentiary rule.

Mason v. State

604 S.W.2d 83 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 2, 1979

Thus determir nation of amount of punishment continued to precede and qualify consideration of probation. … What is clearly contemplated is a proceeding that is adversary in nature.

Crawford v. State

617 S.W.2d 925 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 16, 1980

ascertain and establish that the prospective juror would automatically vote against the death penalty in any case regardless of the facts, could never vote for or consider its imposition in any case irrespective of the evidence … Georgia, 429 U.S. 122 , 97 S.Ct. 399 , 50 L.Ed.2d 339 (1976) [holding that the lack of systematic, intentional exclusion of a qualified group of jurors is not the determining test, but rather, whether “a venireman is improperly

Rodriguez, Steve

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 15, 2005

made him have trouble concentrating, impaired his decisionmaking, and led to low self-esteem and irritability. (4) With his long-term inhalant abuse, applicant acted impulsively, was easily agitated, and could not think clearly … The applicant has failed to establish significant deficits in adaptive skills. The expert evidence is in conflict, but the question is not necessarily controlled by expert testing.

Ford, Ross Layton

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 21, 2009

--Austin 2000, pet. ref'd) (under Rule 104(a) trial court has discretion to determine if expert witnesses are qualified). 23. This was true under common-law principles and has been brought forward under Rule 104(a). … Unfortunately, appellant never appealed the issue of whether the facts contained in Deputy Halcomb's report established probable cause.