Case law

Atkison v. State

79 Tex. Crim. 68 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 26, 1916

The court qualified them by showing that the witness was decidedly adverse to the State, and for that reason he permitted said leading questions. These bills, as qualified, show no error. Carter v. … The charge submitted the question of manslaughter under our manslaughter statute on that phase of the testimony and the well established law by the many decisions of this court, as follows: “You are further instructed, that

Colyandro, Ex Parte John D.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 28, 2010

is clearly without merit. … A contribution with no strings attached would not qualify as such an expenditure.

Colyandro, Ex Parte John D.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 28, 2010

ELLIS & COLYANDRO — 15 defendant’s facial challenge is clearly without merit. … A contribution with no strings attached would not qualify as such an expenditure.

Ellis, Ex Parte James W.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 28, 2010

ELLIS & COLYANDRO — 15 defendant’s facial challenge is clearly without merit. … A contribution with no strings attached would not qualify as such an expenditure.

Riles v. State

117 Tex. Crim. 479 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 29, 1931

Although it had been clearly established by the State’s testimony that the offense occurred on March 28th, and notwithstanding the fact that appellant’s witnesses had only given testimony showing that he was at work at Kelso … In his motion for new trial appellant averred that he did not have a fair and impartial jury to try him, in that one Quoyser, who served as a juror, was prejudiced against him, and had so expressed himself prior to qualifying

Ellis, Ex Parte James W.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 28, 2010

is clearly without merit. … A contribution with no strings attached would not qualify as such an expenditure.

Cowan v. State

840 S.W.2d 435 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 21, 1992

authority in support of this proposition. 12 We also reject the *439 State’s assertion that the Report should not have been admitted because it was not sufficiently trustworthy, as required by the Rule. 13 The Report was clearly … For instance, the business records exception calls for the laying of a predicate as a condition precedent to admission by requiring that a custodian or other qualified witness testify that the documents, made at or near the

Buentello v. State

826 S.W.2d 610 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 4, 1992

The plain language of the Texas rule indicates that jurors are not immune from testifying at a hearing on a motion for new trial. … A distinction as to “overt acts” and mental processes of jurors regarding jury misconduct has never been clearly drawn.

Wall v. State

184 S.W.3d 730 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 18, 2006

Thus, Veal clearly did not give his statement in response to police interrogation. … The evidence overwhelmingly establishes appellant’s guilt, even disregarding the erroneously admitted evidence.

Mendoza, Moises Sandoval

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 5, 2008

Appellant argues that Anthony was "clearly a qualified juror whose answers in both voir dire and on her questionnaire were no different from the non minority jurors." … The State then established that Selman had previous experience and training in sexual assault cases.

Mendoza, Moises Sandoval

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 5, 2008

So I clearly understand that term. … Appellant argues that Anthony was “clearly a qualified juror whose answers in both voir dire and on her questionnaire were no different from the non minority jurors.”

Shappley v. State

520 S.W.2d 766 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 9, 1974

The legislative intent clearly was to impose criminal sanctions for almost any dealing in securities without a license. This is a case of first impression in Texas. … It has been consistently recognized by this Court that this is the general rule; however, several exceptions have been established.

Walker v. State

454 S.W.2d 415 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 29, 1970

The record before this court clearly shows that appellant made an intelligent waiver of his right to have an attorney present at the pre-trial lineup. (Martinez v. … Marshall had been raped by the appellant was subsequently established by her testimony on direct examination.

Johnson v. State

71 Tex. Crim. 428 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 22, 1913

This case clearly comes within the cases of Hill v. State, 22 Texas Crim. App., 579; Garza v. State, 47 S. W. Rep., 983 ; Woodson v. State, 24 Texas Crim. App., 153, and other like cases. … This objection is too general under the well established law, frequently *433 decided by this court, to authorize this court to consider it, and presents no reversible error under the circumstances.

Sinclair v. State

159 Tex. Crim. 35 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 8, 1952

The evidence clearly establishes that a policy game was being kept and exhibited in Dallas County on or about the time alleged in the indictment. … The trial court qualified this bill and declined to certify that the argument was not provoked or invited. In fact, he certifies that the argument was in answer to defense counsel’s argument.

Davis, Jeffery Scott

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 13, 2006

The affidavit alluded to a surveillance, but did not clearly indicate where the surveillance occurred. … Clearly, there are many chemicals that are both legal and which produce a strong odor.

Ex Parte Stout

82 Tex. Crim. 183 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 21, 1917

And he states it also violates subdivision 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which provides that “no State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities … Authorities above are quoted which show that the acts of relator which are denounced by said ordinance were clearly intended to intimidate and coerce all union labor folks and their sympathizers and others,, from going into

Jordan v. State

64 Tex. Crim. 187 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 1, 1911

We will not state the evidence extensively, but instead, will state the conclusions therefrom which were clearly authorized by the evidence. … The court overruled these objections and admitted the said testimony objected to, and in allowing appellant’s bill, qualified it as shown above.

Barrett v. State

516 S.W.2d 181 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 4, 1974

legal size pages, single-spaced and typewritten, containing unedited, repetitious questions and comments covering general principles of criminal law, but also including material on robbery, child witnesses and other areas clearly … "The necessity to question freely and broadly on voir dire in order to decide intelligently when to use one's peremptory challenges has been firmly established as a concomitant to the constitutional right to counsel.

Rocha v. State

16 S.W.3d 1 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 12, 2000

They are not treaties establishing rights of individuals. … The prosecutor clearly explained what he meant by “gang” — that appellant formed a loose association with others to commit crimes.