Case law

Hunter v. State

54 Tex. Crim. 224 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 17, 1908

The testimony shows clearly it alluded to and had reference to the deceased. … The circumstances in this case show clearly that the boy was conscious of impending death.

Ex Parte Fortune

797 S.W.2d 929 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 24, 1990

is validly established. … Here, however, the claim is that the State may not convict petitioner no matter how validly his factual guilt is established.

Halprin, Randy Ethan

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 6, 2024

38 That might occur if a significant number of rulings against the defendant are clearly erroneous, or perhaps if a few significant rulings are clearly in error. … document that was clearly inadmissible hearsay.

Anderson v. State

56 Tex. Crim. 360 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 19, 1909

These charges, we think, clearly answer appellant’s contention, and is a proper definition of what is a credible witness. … The latter clause would clearly be a charge upon the weight of evidence. The first clause is erroneous as a matter of law.

Parks v. State

437 S.W.2d 554 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 19, 1969

The autopsy established that he had been shot three times by a .22 caliber gun. Pearl Toon testified that said date was her first day at work at the Denver Harbor Liquor Store. … In Bumper, the Court said: “The petitioner argues, however, that a jury qualified under such standards must necessarily be biased as well with respect to a defendant’s guilt, and that his conviction must accordingly be reversed

Rose v. State

752 S.W.2d 529 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 15, 1988

The record clearly reflects that when the trial judge made it known to the world, and the appellant and his attorney, of course, that he was going to give the jury the statutory parole law instruction that is declared by … Once the word is out that jurors are totally immune from being called to testify, I fear that serious jury misconduct will commence to take place, to the detriment of the State as well as the accused.

Hodges v. State

137 Tex. Crim. 527 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 1, 1939

“In prosecutions for receiving stolen goods, guilty knowledge is. the gist or substance of the offense to be established by the prosecution; and evidence of collateral offenses is admissible to establish such knowledge.” … The case is clearly distinguishable from the instant one on the facts. Under the peculiar facts of this case, we think this testimony was admissible.

Ex Parte Ross

522 S.W.2d 214 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 16, 1975

This form, signed by the petitioner, tends to establish that he knew of his right to counsel and right to have counsel appointed if he were indigent. … In the present case the trial court clearly informed the petitioner of his right to counsel and determined that he instead wished to exercise his right to a speedy trial without assistance of counsel. See Carr v.

Springsteen, Robert, Iv

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 24, 2006

"Testimony," in turn, is typically "[a] solemn declaration or affirmation made for the purpose of establishing or proving some fact." … The appellant also argued, "Any probative value [the testimony] might have is clearly outweighed by the prejudicial impact" of the evidence.

Wyatt v. State

23 S.W.3d 18 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 3, 2000

. *28 Appellant objected that Thompson had not been qualified as an expert in the area of sexual offenders. … The rule clearly contemplates that some leading questions are acceptable at the trial court’s discretion.

Taylor v. State

10 S.W.3d 673 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 26, 2000

This approach was perhaps most clearly spelled *678 out in Stovall v. … For an interpretation to qualify as a new rule, the interpretation must have been preceded by an earlier inconsistent interpretation.

Brooks v. State

642 S.W.2d 791 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 15, 1982

The State elicited from its witnesses testimony establishing appellant’s possession of heroin at the time of his arrest. … Appellant’s attempt to explain or qualify his earlier testimony, insofar as it constituted such an attempt, was properly permitted by the trial court.

Grant, Derrick Dwayne

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 2010

First, the opponent of the strike must establish a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. Second, the proponent of the strike must articulate a race-neutral explanation. … Dretke.10 While the Court of Appeals seemed at another point to qualify its requirement by saying that the lack of “meaningful voir dire examination” is only “some evidence that the asserted reason for the strike

De La Paz v. State

279 S.W.3d 336 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 25, 2009

And his incentive is he’s trying to keep himself out of prison because we’ll show you when he testified the first time in the grand jury he was given immunity. Appellant did not have to wait his turn to show that Mr. … But this is not like the case where the “State’s direct evidence clearly establishes the intent element and that evidence is not contradicted by appellant nor undermined by appellant’s cross-examination of the State’s witnesses

Lyles v. State

171 Tex. Crim. 468 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 29, 1961

The exhibit was clearly admissible in evidence, under the facts of the case. We can find no harm attached to any testimony concerning this exhibit. … This conviction was affirmed on the basis of the rule that “where the State shows that a burglary has been committed by someone, the confession may be used to establish who the guilty party was.”

Hughes v. State

68 Tex. Crim. 584 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 4, 1912

Such hearsay evidence is admissible to prove death when between members *588 of tlie same family, and thereby establish death, it being shown by this witness that he had continuously for years lived in Texas and that his … The facts are that it was both shown clearly and sufficiently that the assaulted party, A. B.

Zani v. State

758 S.W.2d 233 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 27, 1988

Clearly the federal constitution would not prohibit the states from imposing such a rule applicable only to the prosecution. … This professional should also be able to qualify as an expert in order to aid the court in evaluating the procedures followed.

Grant, Derrick Dwayne

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 2010

First, the opponent of the strike must establish a prima facie showing of racial discrimination. Second, the proponent of the strike must articulate a race-neutral explanation. … Dretke . (10) While the Court of Appeals seemed at another point to qualify its requirement by saying that the lack of "meaningful voir dire examination" is only " some evidence that the asserted reason for the strike was

Thomas v. State

723 S.W.2d 696 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 19, 1986

Shorthouse, supra (grant of use immunity sufficient to compel testimony of witness over claim of privilege under Article I, § 10, supra), with Kastigar v. … In addition to the breath test, you can have a physician, a qualified technician, a chemist or qualified nurse of your own choosing to administer a test or tests within a reasonable time, no more than two hours after your

Bird v. State

692 S.W.2d 65 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 1, 1985

Such predicate must be clearly and satisfactorily established before such testimony can be reproduced. 1 Branch’s Ann.P.C.2d ed., Sec. 99, p. 112.” … Next appellant contends the “trial court erred in excluding jurors from service on appellant’s jury when they were clearly *74 qualified to serve under Article 12.31(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.”