Case law

Flores v. State

110 Tex. Crim. 481 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 2, 1928

The bill of exception presenting this matter has been qualified by the Court without objection by appellant in the following language: “Because the witness testified that after the search warrant had been presented to the … P., inhibiting the admission of certain confessions “unless in connection with said confession he makes statements of facts or circumstances that are found to be true which conduce to establish his guilt. * * * ” Weller v

Paulson v. State

28 S.W.3d 570 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 4, 2000

Then in 1996, we held that whether it is requested or not, failure to submit the Geesa instruction to the jury constitutes “automatic reversible error,” 8 thereby making it immune from harm analysis. … The gravity of the decision and the severity of its consequences should make one pause and hesitate before doing even what is clearly and undoubtedly the right thing to do.

Logan v. State

448 S.W.2d 462 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 19, 1969

They both definitely establish probable cause authorizing the arrest and search under our holdings in Griffey v. State, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 141 , 265 S.W.2d 115 ; Baray v. … We conclude that he was eminently qualified to testify as to the nature of the tools which were introduced in evidence. *465 Mrs.

Garrett v. State

220 S.W.3d 926 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 25, 2007

State, 191 S.W.3d 133, 136 (Tex.Crim.App.2006) (it is well established that courts of appeals may review unassigned error); see, e.g., Romero v. … certain federal constitutional errors labeled by the United States Supreme Court as ‘structural,’ no error, whether it relates to jurisdiction, voluntariness of a plea, or any other mandatory requirement, is categorically immune

Ex Parte Bradshaw

70 Tex. Crim. 166 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 16, 1913

Also to establish, and erect markets and market houses and designate "and control, and regulate market places and privileges." … These immunities have been recognized for many years. By the statute of 50 Geo.

Ballard v. State

519 S.W.2d 426 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 5, 1975

A reading of the objections clearly reveals that counsel for the appellant desired that the psychiatrist should not testify as to statements made by the appellant during the psychiatric examination. … Cr.App.1973) they were not available for that purpose. [1] Janie Montgomery, whom appellant claimed to be his common-law wife, testified under a grant of immunity that Floyd Palmer came to the house where she and appellant

Hooper v. State

100 Tex. Crim. 147 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 13, 1925

This is quite different from the 13th subdivision of said article which provides that where a juror has established in his mind a conclusion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant such as would influence his action … This was clearly erroneous. It could not be held competent under the rule that the accused is called on to answer a criminating statement when made in his presence.

Wilson v. State

80 Tex. Crim. 266 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 11, 1916

The positive, uncontradicted testimony by the State clearly established appellant's guilt. He did not testify himself, nor did he introduce any testimony. Appellant has only two bills of exception in the record. … The first, as qualified by the court, is to the effect that fourteen jurors constituted the panel.

GABALDON, IVAN v. the State of Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 3, 2025

Under the clearly erroneous standard, we would still give significant, if not nearly complete deference to the trial court’s finding. … GABALDON CONCURRENCE – 17 Texas is unique in that it “establishes the offices of County and District Attorneys” under the “Judicial” department of government. TEX. CONST. art. V, § 21.

Johnson v. State

815 S.W.2d 707 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 3, 1991

The plurality opinion in Bradley reasoned that Article 37.09(1), V.A.C.C.P., requires a lesser included offense "to be established by proof of the same or less than all the facts required to establish the ... offense charged … only in the respect that a less culpable mental state suffices to establish its commission.”

Howard v. State

65 Tex. Crim. 25 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 1, 1911

Besides, as qualified by the explanation of the court, the testimony was admissible. … The evidence, in our opinion, without doubt clearly establishes both forgery and the passing of a forged instrument.

Burke, David Todd

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 27, 2012

23 Yoast was clearly instructed about the law in his potential role as juror. … This Court found an abuse of discretion because the juror had clearly stated a bias and prejudice towards the defendant, finding that “[w]hile a trial court may hold a juror qualified who states that he can lay aside any

Burke, David Todd

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 27, 2012

(23) Yoast was clearly instructed about the law in his potential role as juror. … This Court found an abuse of discretion because the juror had clearly stated a bias and prejudice towards the defendant, finding that "[w]hile a trial court may hold a juror qualified who states that he can lay aside any

Cass v. State

676 S.W.2d 589 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 18, 1984

Texas law clearly assures that all such evidence will be adduced.’ … The record establishes the witnesses in issue 5 had known appellant Cass “all his life.”

Brown v. State

55 Tex. Crim. 572 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 20, 1909

As above stated, the evidence is that King was the duly elected and qualified justice of the peace in precinct No. 3; that he went into precinct No. 4, where there was a resident qualified justice of the peace, and held a … on *583 his trial for the offense concerning which the confession is therein made, or unless in connection with said confession, he makes statements of facts or circumstances that are found to he true, which conduce to. establish

Blasdell, Brandon Scott

470 S.W.3d 59 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 16, 2015

We do not address the State’s claim that Rubenzer was not qualified as an expert because we did not grant review of that issue. … (not designated for publication) (testimony about the reliability of eyewitness-identification testimony excluded because Rubenzer was not qualified). .

Ex Parte Muncy

72 Tex. Crim. 541 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 5, 1913

The reprobation of compulsory self-incrimination is an established doctrine of our civilized society. … justify him in refusing to answer almost any question in a criminal case, unless it clearly appeared that the immunity was not set up in good faith.”

Trapper v. State

129 Tex. Crim. 53 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 19, 1935

In the absence of any proof in support of the allegation in the appellant’s motion, the court was clearly right in declining to set aside the bill of indictment. … The court qualified said bill of exception and in his qualification states that Dr.

Sims v. State

99 S.W.3d 600 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 12, 2003

The State argues that the absence of any reference to the two tapes does not establish whether the Court of Appeals considered the audiotape and the videotape. That is true. … And the State’s proposition, followed to its natural conclusion, would make the Court of Appeals immune from review when it affirms the case and says in its opinion that it reviewed all the evidence.

Sharp v. State

495 S.W.2d 906 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 30, 1973

He argues that the state’s primary opinion witness, Forrest Smith (former member and present chairman of the Dallas Movie Classification Board) did not qualify as an expert. … The film shows nothing but isolated acts of sexual conduct and clearly demonstrates that its sole object is the commercial exploitation of the prurient interest of those persons who paid to view it.