Case law

Ex Parte Wolters

64 Tex. Crim. 238 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 6, 1911

The House, in this case, as well as its committee, clearly and unequivocally, determined, decided and adjudged that Mr. … Each and all these proceedings are clearly and fully and completely shown in the journal of the House.

Williams, Eric Lyle

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 1, 2017

Williams—50 Specifically, Williams asserts that Jeffress “was not properly qualified and did not meet the ‘Kelly’[67] standards of proof.” … Williams’s complaint that Jeffress was not qualified does not comport with his objections during the Daubert68 hearing, and so it is not preserved.

State v. Martinez

570 S.W.3d 278 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 20, 2019

Because Comeaux was a plurality opinion, it did not establish binding precedent. Hardy , 963 S.W.2d at 519 . … One clearly has a reasonable and legitimate expectation of privacy in such personal information contained in his body fluids.").

Hernandez v. State

116 S.W.3d 26 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 4, 2003

He stated: There has been no proper predicate to establish the ... reliability of the testing procedures and this gentleman has not been qualified as an expert. … The case does establish that ADx testing occurred as early as 1992.

Cantu, Alberto

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 7, 2008

, appellant never requested a speedy trial; he sought only an outright dismissal and tried to prove that he acted on the desire for a speedy resolution before he was charged. (55) In the trial judge's eyes, he failed to establish … App. 1983) ("Although a motion to dismiss notifies the State and the court of the speedy trial claim, a defendant's motivation in asking for dismissal rather than a prompt trial is clearly relevant, and may sometimes attenuate

Cantu, Alberto

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 7, 2008

App. 1983) (“Although a motion to dismiss notifies the State and the court of the speedy trial claim, a defendant’s motivation in asking for dismissal rather than a prompt trial is clearly relevant, and may sometimes attenuate … Here, appellant never requested a speedy trial; he sought only an outright dismissal and tried to prove that he acted on the desire for a speedy resolution before he was charged.55 In the trial judge’s eyes, he failed to establish

Ex Parte Alba

256 S.W.3d 682 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 9, 2008

. * * * To qualify, the alternative procedure must be feasible, readily implemented, and in fact significantly reduce a substantial risk of severe pain. … ("the Legislature clearly has intended for Article 11.071 to provide the exclusive means by which this Court may exercise its original habeas corpus jurisdiction in death penalty cases."). . See Tex Const, art.

Robertson, Mark

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 9, 2011

And that's only if she became qualified. … Woods's testimony does not establish that the warden's testimony was false or misleading. 5. Prison is filled with psychopaths.

Haley Brown v. RK Hall Construction, LTD., RKH Capital, LLC, and Stacy Lyon D/B/A Lyon Barricade & Construction

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 25, 2015

Whether good cause exists for this Court to grant Petitioner additional time in which to perfect her permissive interlocutory appeal given that: (1) the Trial Court clearly intended to grant Petitioner the permissive right … Immunity under Section 97.002 of the Texas Civil Practices and Remedies Code; 2.

Buntion v. State

482 S.W.3d 58 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 27, 2016

The article clearly explained that the Parole Board would make any release decisions. … SCARDINO: I’ll ask her the qualifying question. Q. (BY MR- SCARDINO) I’m. not going to split hairs with you.

Ramos, Enrique Angel

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 20, 2021

of whether the accused is convicted of violations of the same section more than once or is convicted of violations of more than one section[.]”). 2 Appellant challenged the sufficiency of the evidence to establish … Consequently, the Blockburger presumption—i.e., that they are not the same offense—has not “clearly” been rebutted. Ex parte Benson, 459 S.W.3d 67, 89 (Tex. Crim. App. 2015).

Sandoval, Gustavo Tijerina

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 7, 2022

He points to testimony by both Rangers Vela and O’Connor that Appellant did not clearly invoke this right. … Article 37.08 does not clearly dictate whether to adopt the “acquittal first” or “modified acquittal first” approach.

Robertson, Mark

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 9, 2011

And that’s only if she became qualified. … Woods’s testimony does not establish that the warden’s testimony was false or misleading. 5. Prison is filled with psychopaths.

Calderon v. State

63 Tex. Crim. 639 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 22, 1911

“Implied malice is that which the law infers from or imputes to certain acts, however suddenly done; thus, when the fact of an unlawful killing is established, and the facts do not establish express malice, beyond a reasonable … He is much better qualified to judge of the weight to be given to the evidence and the credibility of the witnesses than this court can be.

Arnold v. State

786 S.W.2d 295 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 24, 1990

barred by decisional rules and not permitted by § 4(d), and consequently counsel seldom have a real factual basis for arguing those matters to the jury, Rose, supra, at 537 , the impact of a § 4 instruction is virtually immune … However, that contribution to punishment “does not establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the erroneously given instruction made no contribution to the punishment.” Olivarez v. State, supra, at 115.

Joshua Jacobs v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 9, 2016

Instead, he argues the trial court erred by determining that the Louisiana offense of sexual battery qualifies as a substantially similar sexual offense in Texas for purposes of section 12.42. … In subsection (b) it clearly states that the separate offense must only be described by Subsection (a)(1) or (2).

Rogers v. State

774 S.W.2d 247 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 3, 1989

Clearly, she was not initially moved by anything the judge said to take this position. … That is to say, the Legislature really did not intend to require a qualified person to perform one's civic duty to serve as a juror where the judge is willing to let "excuse" serve as "cause."

Cockrell v. State

933 S.W.2d 73 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 11, 1996

Well, the first thing I did is to qualify and talk to him on about how he wanted to word the statement. … Appellant further claims these arguments were improper because they “clearly invited the jury to discredit appellant’s defense, clearly striking at appellant over his attorney’s shoulder.”

Messer v. State

729 S.W.2d 694 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 1, 1987

The State pointed to certain live testimony of a police officer, but the Court found that the officer was not qualified to testify a substance is heroin. Ibid. … Recognizing its predicament and “manifestly struggling to avoid granting relief,” Ex parte Aaron, supra, the Court first opined that “Burks and Greene do not clearly require that the relief sought be granted,” and then set

Lyles v. State

850 S.W.2d 497 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 3, 1993

As was noted in Matyastik , subsection (a) is contingent upon the time limitations established in subsection (c). Subsection (a) is dependent upon subsection (c) to establish the timeframes for mandatory remittitur. … Since the partial remittitur was clearly within the power of the court and there was no abuse of discretion in the exercise of this power, the judgment of the Court of Appeals is reversed and the judgment of the trial court