Case law

Vance v. State

122 Tex. Crim. 157 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 9, 1932

The matter of guilt of the offense is established by the plea, except in cases in which the evidence introduced demonstrates the innocence of the accused of the offense for which he is charged. See Anderson v. … On the face of the bills we think that the claim that error is disclosed is untenable, and it is clearly made so by the bills as qualified.

Lutz v. State

146 Tex. Crim. 503 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 17, 1943

All of appellant's bills of exceptions, save one, were qualified by the trial court. … Appellant refused to accept the bills of exception as qualified, whereupon the trial court filed the bills of exception as qualified by him as the court's bills of exception.

Ex Parte Williams

21 L.R.A. 783 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 19, 1892

If relator expects to escape the taxing power of the State, he must show clearly his constitutional right so to do. In speaking of the power of taxation, Mr. … Richmond, 23 Grattan, 464, the court says that while the lawyer could not be deprived of his right except by the judgment of a court, it was also a valuable civil right and privilege, to which were attached valuable immunities

Sorrell v. State

79 Tex. Crim. 437 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 5, 1916

The bill, as qualified, shows that pending the trial two of these witnesses appeared and testified. … We think all these rules are clearly applicable herein.

Holloway v. State

613 S.W.2d 497 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 1, 1981

The prosecutor’s response — that the opinion was formed on the *503 basis of conversations had with “people who knew appellant” 17 — clearly did not meet or remove the ground of objection. … , or established by evidence; “his opinion is without value, and is inadmissible, if based upon facts and circumstances gleaned by him from ex-parte statements of third persons, and not established by legal evidence before

Murphy, Anne Elizabeth

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 21, 2009

. § 12.31(b) is its own clearly stated  3 mandate that the venire in a non-death capital murder … In the instant case, appellant has failed to show that she was deprived of a jury that was comprised of legally qualified jurors.

Murphy, Anne Elizabeth

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 21, 2009

. § 12.31 (b) is its own clearly stated mandate that the venire in a non-death capital murder case shall know the guilty defendant will receive a sentence of life without parole, any review of the harm caused by the trial … In the instant case, appellant has failed to show that she was deprived of a jury that was comprised of legally qualified jurors.

Rose v. State

165 Tex. Crim. 478 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 6, 1957

The trial court sustained the appellant’s objection and instructed the jury not to consider the same and qualified the bill by certifying that the tag referred to was not placed in the hands of the jury. … Clearly, this argument was improper, but we must determine if it was harmful to the appellant.

Yorko v. State

690 S.W.2d 260 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 22, 1985

A legislative act must be sustained unless it is clearly invalid beyond a reasonable doubt. … William Simon of Houston, who is an eminently qualified expert in the field of human sexual behavior, has testified that it should be lawful for persons who are not licensed and certified psychologists to distribute, disseminate

Conklin v. State

144 Tex. Crim. 210 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 27, 1942

W. (2d) 45 and cases therein cited. (3) Evidence was heard upon the motion to quash the indictment, and the following facts established. … That he is not a qualified grand juror.” (5) Art. 339 C. C.

Solon v. State

54 Tex. Crim. 261 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 22, 1908

The rule is universal that the courts will not declare an act of the Legislature unconstitutional unless such infirmity and vice clearly appears. … If, however, this view is not correct, then clearly the tax may be sustained upon another ground.

Ex Parte Hart

41 Tex. Crim. 581 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 7, 1900

The Constitution of this State, both before and since the amendment of 1891, clearly authorizes the creation of corporation courts. … We clearly think so.

Slagle v. State

570 S.W.2d 916 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 20, 1978

The evidence adduced by appellant does not “clearly preclude” the jury from finding the presumed fact. … In addition to the breath test you have the right to have a physician, qualified technician, chemist or qualified professional nurse of your own choosing administer a chemical test, or tests, within a reasonable time (not

Fisher v. State

379 S.W.2d 900 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 13, 1964

It is a well established general rule affirmed by statute in this state, that a confession of guilt by an accused is admissible against him when, and only when, it was freely and voluntarily made without having been induced … The opinion by Judge Morrow also clearly sets out the rule as to inducements relied upon by a defendant when made by the injured party.

Apodaca v. State

140 Tex. Crim. 593 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 30, 1940

Demonstration by an act “which tends to self-incrimination is as obnoxious to the immunity guaranteed by the Constitution as one by words.” See Ruling Case Law, Vol. 28, page 434, Sec. 20; Wharton’s Crim. … We think the record clearly presents the legal question involved. Stated in another way, we are of opinion that it is reflected that appellant was compelled to give evidence against himself.

Chase, Ryan Francis

448 S.W.3d 6 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 19, 2014

These actions would seem to satisfy the basic principle of error preservation that a party is required to “let the trial judge know what he wants, why he thinks himself entitled to it, and to do so clearly enough for the … It is well established that the mere fact the Legislature adopts a criminal statute does not mean this court must accept it as a standard for civil liability.”). . Id. .

Mizell v. State

81 Tex. Crim. 241 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · May 2, 1917

The court in qualifying the bill says: “I concluded that the jury did not discuss the failure of the defendant to testify, but that defendant did not offer any eyidence to contradict the witnesses and that the court *248 … Under the authorities cited this was clearly receiving testimony after their retirement which was not before them on the trial.

Ex Parte Meyer

84 Tex. Crim. 288 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Oct 23, 1918

This will, this power on the subject, is absolute and exclusive in the qualified voters of the locality. . . . … "Being simply a chart containing limitations upon power, whenever the Constitution declares how power may be exercised over any subject, then no power can be exercised over that subject in any manner not clearly within the

Oates v. State

48 Tex. Crim. 131 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 12, 1905

In other words, there must be a compliance with the terms of the contract on the part of such person agreeing to turn State’s evidence, before he can claim immunity. … We believe the court committed error in not charging directly that Frank Me Cue was an accomplice; that is, if we take the charge as given on this subject, it was clearly misleading.

State v. Vasilas

187 S.W.3d 486 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 22, 2006

Clearly, Appellee misses the point of § 37.10, which does not effectively disbar attorneys, but makes them criminally liable if they tamper with a governmental record. … Terrazas, 4 S.W.3d 720 (Tex.Crim.App.1999), clearly qualify as governmental records.