Case law

Findley v. State

378 S.W.2d 850 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 11, 1964

Melvin Barnard, upon being granted immunity, testified to substantially the same facts set forth in appellant’s confession. … The prior conviction was established.

Mutscher v. State

514 S.W.2d 905 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 24, 1974

It is clearly within the power of Congress to enact such a statute.” … If error, the charts are clearly harmless error.

Hamilton v. State

82 Tex. Crim. 544 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 12, 1917

The evidence was ample and clearly sufficient to establish appellant’s guilt. Appellant has a very meager bill of exceptions objecting to the testimony of Mr. … Appellant and his wife and mother testified to- what would have been sufficient to have established an alibi for him if believed by the jury.

Jester v. State

100 Tex. Crim. 409 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 3, 1925

His bills clearly show that the court held each of the thirteen men hereinafter mentioned qualified and tendered them to him with nineteen others from which to draw the jury. … The facts stated by the jurors as above detailed clearly bring this case within the rule governing opinions derived at least in part from original sources. Keaton v. State, 40 Texas Crim. Rep. 139 , 47 S. W. 90 .

in Re the State of Texas, Ex Rel Kim Ogg

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 15, 2021

Without them, I do not believe the Court can say that there is one rational decision under clearly established law. … Given that, Relator has not established a clear right to relief.

Hughes v. State

59 Tex. Crim. 294 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 11, 1910

This testimony was objected to because it called for an opinion of the witness, and same was not the best evidence that could be had to establish the facts attempted to be proven. … We think the evidence is clearly sufficient to show by satisfactory proof that appellant forged this instrument.

Gibson v. State

144 S.W.3d 530 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 15, 2004

He qualified his answer — And we can go back to the record. But he qualified his record [sic] at one point and said, but if there is more evidence I would be okay. And, in fact, there is more evidence in this case. … We, therefore, do not address the State's claim or the Court of Appeals decision that “deem[ed] it established that [veniremember 7] is a member of a different racial group than [veniremember 11]” because the prosecutor "

Saucier v. State

156 Tex. Crim. 301 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 22, 1950

“Paragraph two of paragraph 15 especially is objected to because it refers to multiple accomplice witnesses without requiring the jury to find according to the established laws of this land under what circumstance, they may … We think it is evident from the testimony of the witness that he was a qualified witness. See Nations v. State, 91 Tex. Cr. R. 112 , 237 S.W. 570 ; Singleton v. State, 57 Tex. Cr. R. 560 , 124 S.W. 92 .

Tompkins v. State

774 S.W.2d 195 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 7, 1987

Appellant’s contention that Drummond and Murphy were not qualified “bad” reputation witnesses is overruled. … We agree with appellant that neither argument was called for under this record, and both were clearly improper.

Miller v. State

79 Tex. Crim. 9 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 15, 1915

It is, as clearly laid down in Miller v. State, 31 Tex.Crim. … The preponderance of the evidence, without doubt, clearly established appellant's guilt. So that it is conclusively shown no injury whatever occurred to appellant in all this matter.

Stephens v. State

128 Tex. Crim. 311 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 6, 1935

In fact, he had no knowledge of it and therefore it was clearly hearsay. … indictment against him should not be used to destroy that presumption of law nor can the indictment be appropriated by the jury as any evidence of guilt, neither should the same be used to impugn his good reputation which he has established

Sidney B. Hale, Jr. v. City of Bonham

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Aug 6, 2015

Governmental immunity protects municipalities such as the City of Bonham from lawsuits for damages unless immunity has been clearly and unambiguously waived by the Legislature. Tooke v. … Tooke, 197 S.W.3d at 331-32 (sovereign immunity in the absence of a clear legislative waiver is the firmly established principle); see also Wheelabrator Air Pollution Control, Inc., 381 S.W.3d at 604 (sovereign immunity

Ex Parte Grothe

687 S.W.2d 736 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 3, 1984

Constitution requires that courts recognize a qualified privilege for the press not to be required to testify. … Thus implicitly, the Supreme Court has recognized that the press is not immune from subpoena.

Davis v. State

872 S.W.2d 743 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 18, 1994

There is no evidence indicating that Royal would necessarily have been immune from prosecution. … Moreover, apart from qualifying as a statement against interest, a third party's statement implicating the accused may be inadmissible as violative of the accused’s rights under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment

Owens, Charles Ray Jr. v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 28, 2015

expert testimony to establish competency. … evidence suffices to establish competency under the criteria set forth in the competency statute.

Grantland v. State

65 Tex. Crim. 639 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 27, 1912

We think, as qualified, there was no error shown in this matter. … It was part of the assault and was clearly admissible testimony. 3.

Ambrose, Cynthia

487 S.W.3d 587 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 27, 2016

The trial court further found that Ramirez was provided transactional immunity in exchange for her testimony. … Ramirez received immunity during Ms.

McDonald v. State

77 Tex. Crim. 612 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 27, 1915

As qualified this bill shows no error. … In approving the bill the court qualified it as follows: “This bill is approved with the qualification that the witness Mrs.

Hill v. State

144 Tex. Crim. 415 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 22, 1941

I did not know of one that was qualified. … Each bill is qualified by the court and the qualification clearly shows that the argument complained of was invited by appellant's counsel.

McGaughey v. State

74 Tex. Crim. 529 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 6, 1914

*Page 534 Clearly he did not bring himself within the rules authorizing the court to grant a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence. … Clearly this bill shows no error. If we could go to the statement of facts we would find that this statement by the witness was clearly admissible under the facts of this case.