Case law

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.

Braughton, Christopher Ernest

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 19, 2018

The statute lists the crimes that qualify. Id. 4 Id. 5 See also McGrew v. State, 128 Tex. … That would establish reason to believe that Appellant needed to act to prevent a murder or attempted murder.

Green v. State

53 Tex. Crim. 490 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 13, 1908

The writing or memorandum must be delivered to the opposite party for his inspection, that he may cross-examine the witness in regard to it, and it may be shown to the jury, not for the purpose of establishing the facts therein … The necessity of producing the memoranda, and the reasons which require its production, are very clearly and fully set forth in the principal case, and need not be further stated here.

Wechsler v. State

172 Tex. Crim. 559 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 31, 1962

We have concluded that the record before us here fails to establish affirmatively that such was the case. … The trial judge correctly held that without the approval of the court the district attorney had no authority to grant immunity to the appellant. See Washburn v. State, 164 Tex.Cr.R. 448 , 299 S.W.2d 706 .

CRAWFORD, SHAWN EDWARD v. the State of Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 26, 2025

CRAWFORD — 13 sheriff, then the offense would qualify as lesser-included under Appellant’s indictment. … PROC. art. 37.09(1) (“An offense is a lesser included offense if . . . it is established by proof of the same or less than all the facts required to establish the commission of the offense charged.”).

Howard v. State

72 Tex. Crim. 624 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 28, 1914

Even, if under the circumstances, it had been nec *627 essary to read these orders to the jury before the argument began, or the evidence closed, the court, under the statute and decisions, clearly had the discretion to permit … In hearing the motion for new trial the court heard evidence and it is established that the sheriff had not been sworn before he summoned that talesman. He has no bill of exceptions on the subject.

Sanchez, Arthur Garcia

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 13, 2006

State . (26) UNASSIGNED ERROR Shortly after the courts of appeals acquired criminal appellate jurisdiction in Texas, it was established in Carter v. … Thus, the parties clearly joined issue, inter alia , on the elemental questions of whether the verbal sexual conduct was unwelcome, and whether the appellant knew it was unwelcome.

Robbins, Neal Hampton

478 S.W.3d 678 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 26, 2014

But, in order to qualify - as “scientific knowledge,” an inference or assertion must be derived by the scientific method. … As Justice Scalia has stated, “[f]orensic evidence is not uniquely immune from the risk of manipulation,” 62 or incompetence, or innocent errors, or cognitive bias.

in Re the State of Texas, Ex Rel. David P. Weeks

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 16, 2013

for mandamus relief when the factual scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established. … establishes that proposition.

Bustamante v. State

106 S.W.3d 738 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 4, 2003

While no completed theft occurred, proof of a completed theft is not required to establish the underlying offense of robbery or attempted robbery. 12 Moreover, an intent to steal may be inferred from *741 circumstantial evidence … Upon the State’s request, the trial court granted Bill immunity for any testimony given at the trial and ordered him to testify.

in Re the State of Texas, Ex Rel. David P. Weeks

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 16, 2013

scenario has never been precisely addressed but the principle of law has been clearly established. … establishes that proposition.

Harrell v. State

725 S.W.2d 208 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 17, 1986

His testimony satisfied the last two prongs of the test established in Hill, supra. … I believe it clearly does.

Smith v. State

157 Tex. Crim. 21 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 9, 1952

The court qualifies the bill by stating that no objection or exception to the argument was made. … The original opinion discusses very clearly other questions raised in the case which need not be further considered. Appellant's motion for rehearing is overruled.

FRASER, MARIAN v. the State of Texas

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 3, 2025

Felony injury to a child qualifies as an underlying felony in a felony murder prosecution. See id. (citing Johnson v. State, 4 S.W.3d 254, 258 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999)). … Later that month, the same magistrate judge issued a search warrant that allowed those seized electronic devices to be forensically searched by a qualified and certified technician.

Quillin v. State

79 Tex. Crim. 497 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 17, 1916

Druesdow, in Harris County, Texas, on or about May 1, 1914, and before this indictment was presented, was an officer of thé government of said State, towit, was the duly elected, qualified and acting collector of taxes in … The authorities clearly establish the principle that one can be a principal of another when physically, or actually, incapable of committing the offense himself; for instance, in rape, in order to commit that offense, whether

Casanova, Matthew John

383 S.W.3d 530 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 21, 2012

Discounting Garza’s own accomplice testimony that directly established the appellant’s complicity, the remaining evidence unfolded as follows. … . . . 51 Id. 52 The appellant cites a number of cases from other jurisdictions in support of his argument that trial court error in failing to read the jury charge aloud should be immune

Duckett v. State

797 S.W.2d 906 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 10, 1990

Under our interpretation of the rules, such testimony which merely embraces an ultimate issue is clearly admissible under Rule 704. … Appellant established this was "subject ... upon which expert opinion would assist the jury.”) . This problem is not a product of modern society.

Jordan v. State

928 S.W.2d 550 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 12, 1996

The Court explained: [I]n order to qualify as “scientific knowledge,” an inference or assertion must be derived by the scientific method. … In short, the requirement that an expert’s testimony pertain to “scientific knowledge” establishes a standard of evidentiary reliability. Id.

Allen v. State

169 Tex. Crim. 318 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 24, 1960

Appeals said: "The correct doctrine is that the change of venue in any case depends upon whether the judge is satisfied as to its expediency or inexpediency; and his discretion determining it will not be revised unless it is clearly … He must first undergo, instead, a trial before his right to be tried in another and different atmosphere can be established.

Millican v. State

63 Tex. Crim. 440 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 25, 1911

The -court in allowing this bill, qualified it as follows: “Mr. … The first five bills are clearly insufficient to require this court to pass upon either of them. See sections 857, p. 557, and 1123, p. 732, of White’s.