Case law

In Re Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Relator

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 14, 2023

In short, Relator has failed to establish a clear right to relief here because the law on this question is unsettled. … Relator has failed to establish a clear right to relief based on an absence of any well-settled, clearly controlling authority.

Melton v. State

63 Tex. Crim. 362 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 18, 1911

As qualified by the judge, it showed no diligence. … Clearly, this bill does not show any error on the part of the court.

Taylor v. State

109 S.W.3d 443 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 2, 2003

The issue instead is a misstatement of the law which resulted in a jury that was not properly qualified to consider the range of punishment. … Even if we considered the right to a qualified jury to be only a substantial right, then the error of seating a jury which is not properly qualified on the issue of punishment still should not be disregarded under Rule 44.2

Ex Parte Massey

49 Tex. Crim. 60 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 6, 1905

That was simply a limitation on the Legislature with reference to authorizing the establishment of lotteries within this State. … This principle has been since followed, as the established doctrine in this State.

Ex Parte Smith

132 S.W.3d 407 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 21, 2004

This is evidence of below-average educational abilities and attainment, but it does not reflect even mild mental retardation, nor does it qualify as a severe handicap. … Applicant has failed to establish any such evi-dentiary link.

Irby v. State

327 S.W.3d 138 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 16, 2010

Appellant’s Brief at 21 ("This Court has clearly held, under Davis v. … Thus, the State clearly had considerable power and control over that witness’s fate. Id.

Ross v. State

53 Tex. Crim. 162 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 11, 1908

It would seem to be clear that wherever a juror is partial to such an extent that he has got a conclusion established in his mind as to the guilt or innocence of the accused party he should not be permitted to sit in the … Clearly, where they have heard testimony in another trial, and formed an opinion as to the guilt of defendant in this, they are not competent jurors.”

Newbury, Donald Keith

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 21, 2004

A juror is not qualified to serve if there is established in the mind of the juror such a conclusion as to the guilt or innocence of the defendant as would influence the jurors action(s) in reaching a verdict. … Then in the Court's discretion, make a determination whether or not that person is qualified to serve.

Freeman v. State

556 S.W.2d 287 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 18, 1977

qualified and the overruling of the challenge for cause as to him presents no error.” … to rebut the presumption of a prospective juror’s impartiality would be to establish an impossible standard.

State v. Medrano

67 S.W.3d 892 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 6, 2002

Jennifer saw the man’s face clearly, but could not recall the car’s license plate number. The car then drove further down the street and parked behind the pizza delivery man’s truck. … As discussed above, the judicial limitation upon the state’s right to appeal established in Roberts was flawed from the outset, has proven unworkable, and creates inconsistency and confusion in the law.

Carter v. State

135 Tex. Crim. 457 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 1937

Bills of exception numbers 10, 14, 17, 28, 30, 31, 32, 33, 35, 37, 46, 48, 49, 53, 56, 59, and 70, are all qualified and as thus qualified, fail to reveal reversible error. … Box 698, said testimony was clearly admissible as a circum *472 stance in the development of the State’s case, seeking to establish a conspiracy among the appellant and his confederates.

Granger v. State

683 S.W.2d 387 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 19, 1984

Although the State offered her immunity with the court’s consent, and the court ordered her to testify, she steadfastly refused to testify and was held in contempt. … The record clearly reflects that there was in fact an agreement, albeit a tacit one, to reward Anderson for her testimony.

Parks v. State

746 S.W.2d 738 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 9, 1987

It has become well established that such evidence is clearly admissible when the prosecution can show both that the offense or transaction is relevant to a material issue in the case, and the probative value of the evidence … On page 740 the majority says that it is "well established that such evidence [of extraneous offense] is clearly admissible when the prosecution can show ... the probative value of the evidence to the trier of fact is not

Matlock, Marcus Dewayne

392 S.W.3d 662 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 27, 2013

He had worked in fast-food restaurants, but sometimes they wouldn’t hire him because he was “over-qualified.” He worked at the Family Care Center for almost a year after he was released from jail in March, 2006. … states why the verdict is so much against the great weight of the evidence as to be manifestly unjust, conscience-shocking, or clearly biased.34 If an appellate court conducting a factual-sufficiency review finds

Paster v. State

701 S.W.2d 843 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 24, 1985

Clearly, the infirmity in the caption in Crisp is not present. … That is clearly wrong and I would object to it,” was sustained and the jury was instructed to disregard same. Motion for mistrial was overruled.

Blankenship v. State

673 S.W.2d 578 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 18, 1984

“THE COURT: I don’t think you are qualified to represent yourself in Court. … This Court requires no formulaic questioning to establish a knowing and intelligent waiver nor will it author a script for courtroom recitation by trial judges faced with this dilemma.

Larson v. State

106 Tex. Crim. 261 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 28, 1925

State of West Virginia, 129 U.S. 114 , 32 L.Ed. 623 , clearly recognizes the right of the state to fix an educational qualification on one seeking to practice medicine. … We infer, however, that he claims the section to be objectionable because, no matter how well qualified by learning and skill or experience one may be, he has no absolute right to be examined by the board unless he has a

Carey v. State

74 Tex. Crim. 112 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 8, 1914

It is now elementary and well established in this State, both by statute and a large number of decisions of this court, that this court is not authorized,—in fact, by statute expressly forbid,den (C. C. … Appellant’s bill, as qualified by the court, shows no error in excluding the testimonji- of Mrs. Stutts as to what her husband told her. And, as qualified by the court, appellant’s bills to the testimony of Mrs.

Lewis v. State

48 Tex. Crim. 149 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 26, 1905

Clearly this was admissible testimony, since it indicates the State’s theory that the instrument was fraudulently executed. … This could in no way bind appellant; nor would it be a fact going to establish his criminality.

Goodwin v. State

70 Tex. Crim. 600 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 4, 1913

In allowing appellant’s bill to the overruling of her motion, the court qualified it by stating: "When Mrs. … Even if we could consider this bill, such testimony by them was clearly admissible. Mackey v. State, 151 S. W. Rep., 802 , and cases there cited in the rehearing opinion.