Case law

Christian v. State

592 S.W.2d 625 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 23, 1980

Clearly, the answer is that they were not and, consonantly, the connection, if not completely broken, was sufficiently attenuated. … The general statement of the plain view concept quoted in the body above omits qualifying language which usually is included; viz: an officer “who has a right to be in a position to have the view,” e. g., Abbott v.

Schutz v. State

957 S.W.2d 52 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 3, 1997

Clearly, where “fantasizing” is used as a synonym for “lying” the two should be treated the same. … We agree that ruling out manipulation or fantasy does not conclusively establish that the allegations are true.

Smith, Ex Parte Laroyce Lathair

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 evidentiary link.

Janecka v. State

739 S.W.2d 813 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 12, 1987

Judge Clinton reasoned that clearly an indictment was required to allege that the defendant committed an offense. … This Court found that the additional material requested by the defendant was clearly a matter of form and also was clearly necessary to give the defendant adequate notice with which to prepare a defense.

Williams v. State

252 S.W.3d 353 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jan 16, 2008

invalid because the trial judge failed to inquire into her indigent status and admonish her about the right to appointed counsel. [1] The court held that the error was structural constitutional error that is categorically immune … and unequivocably asserted." [16] Once asserted, under Faretta, the trial judge must inform the defendant about "the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that `he knows what

Ex Parte Haliburton

755 S.W.2d 131 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 29, 1988

And it has been held by this Court in the past that the mere alleged use of peremptory challenges to strike qualified blacks is not a prohibited systematic exclusion of blacks in the selection of petit jurors. … The judge of the convicting court clearly viewed the application as advancing only a Batson claim of error, and in his finding of fact and conclusions of law found that a Batson error claim was not entertainable on collateral

Cargill, Kimberly

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Nov 19, 2014

With respect to qualification, the proponent must establish that the expert has knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education regarding the specific issue before the court that would qualify the expert to give an … Lipman’s testimony that he sometimes helped neuropsychologists and physicians with complex cases did not necessarily establish that he was qualified to give an opinion concerning the psychological effects of physical illness

Treadway v. State

65 Tex. Crim. 208 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 7, 1912

In *224 approving the bill on that subject he qualified it “as shown by the statement of the facts.” … Rep., 373 , clearly states an old and well established rule, which should never be overlooked; but always applied in passing on the charges of inferior courts.

Harris, James Jr.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 9, 2016

THE COURT: You can go into prior cases where he has been found to be not qualified. … An essential warning was clearly left off, or it was involuntary. Can you wholly disregard the statement and confession and not consider it for any purpose? [Lee]. Yes, ma’am. [Prosecutor].

Casillas v. State

733 S.W.2d 158 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jul 2, 1986

Establishing the MESBIC under SBA regulations required private matching funds of $150,000, which took some time for MACEP to accumulate. … Clearly, the presence or absence of written evidence of the debt, securely kept, was important to McClain’s opinion.

Ex Parte Woods

745 S.W.2d 21 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Feb 17, 1988

Hypothetical testimony alone by a qualified psychiatrist, even one who has not examined the individual, is admissible and in such cases Estelle v. Smith, supra, is not ordinarily applicable. Vanderbilt v. … The rule provides in substance that the findings of the federal district judge in habeas corpus proceedings will not be disturbed unless “clearly erroneous.”

Ex Parte Bennett

85 Tex. Crim. 315 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 12, 1919

Oppenheimer, supra, construing sections 16 and 22, even before the 1891 amendment, Judge Gaines says: “The latter section clearly empowered the Legislature to take away the jurisdiction of the county court of a particular … We are confronted with the question: What is the meaning of this last qualifying paragraph “with such exceptions and under such regulations as may be prescribed by law.”

Andrews v. State

744 S.W.2d 40 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Sep 23, 1987

Viewing the above evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict of the jury, in conjunction with the above instruction, we conclude that any rational trier of fact could find the evidence sufficient to establish beyond … Had appellant more clearly articulated to Simon the law of parties as to how it might apply to the issue of guilt in a capital murder case and answering the punishment special issues, and it was clearly demonstrated that

Abbot v. State

94 Tex. Crim. 31 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Mar 7, 1923

The bills of exception complaining of the refusal of the court to order attachments for absent veniremen are qualified by the trial court and the qualification accepted by appellant, it being stated that attachments were … Such accomplice testimony might be believed to be true, and it might connect the accused with the offense *Page 36 charged, and still not establish the guilt of the accused beyond a reasonable doubt.

Lawhorn v. State

898 S.W.2d 886 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Apr 5, 1995

The appellant is supposed to qualify for this latter category because he “could not as a matter of law, have intended to commit the offense of escape when he entered the apartment” because it was legally impossible for him … Likewise, the attempt to pick an empty pocket is as much an attempt to steal as is the attempt to pick a pocket with money in it because the actor’s conduct would clearly offend the law if the facts were as he supposed.

Cantu v. State

842 S.W.2d 667 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 3, 1992

Okay, thank you, sir. * * * * * * [BY THE COURT]: All you have to be is a qualified juror. … We note that appellant never clearly articulated what specific questions he desired to ask the venireperson.

Isassi v. State

330 S.W.3d 633 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Dec 8, 2010

Even if this were true — if appellant had communicated only “the word on the street” that Constable Campos was under investigation — this would not “immunize Isassi’s intent to benefit his relative by securing the dismissal … Later testimony established that, after the investigation was completed, Constable Campos was cleared on any criminal wrong-doing. .

State v. Aguilera

165 S.W.3d 695 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 22, 2005

Harris is clearly different from the issue presented here, as the re-sentencing was done the next day and there can be no dispute that Harris had begun serving his sentence. … Such mistakes ought not be cast in stone. [7] "The Constitution does not require *701 that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner." [8] Similarly, the rule fails to

Doan, Ex Parte Dustin

369 S.W.3d 205 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 20, 2012

The federal due-process minimum was established by Morrissey v. … The amendment clearly treated municipal, county courts, and felony prosecutors as separate classes of parties.

Nenno v. State

970 S.W.2d 549 · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · Jun 24, 1998

But the record clearly shows that appellant was aware he could receive the death penalty for his crime. … We find the reliability of Lanning’s testimony to be sufficiently established under Rulé 702.