Case law

Robert Leon Mason, Jr. v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 28, 2013

“The critical question” in deciding whether a statement qualifies as an excited utterance is “whether the declarant was still dominated by the emotion caused by the startling event when she spoke.” Coble v. … “This can be established by looking at all of the circumstances surrounding the offense.”

Kaitlyn Lucretia Ritcherson v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 23, 2015

However, the evidence produced must be sufficient to establish the lesser-included offense as a "valid, rational alternative" to the charged offense. Id. … The trial court then asked the detective some clarifying questions, which clearly established that the detective had left the room and that the statements were made to the appellant’s mother. 26RR 121-24.

Rickye Henderson v. Ali Arabzadegan

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 16, 2024

Under Rule 145, the following evidence qualifies as a prima facie showing that the declarant is unable to afford payment of costs: (1) the declarant or the declarant’s dependent receives benefits from a means … “An issue is conclusively established ‘if reasonable minds could not differ about the conclusion to be drawn from the facts in the record.’” Community Health Sys. Prof’l Servs. Corp. v.

Brett Clark v. Heidi L. Binder

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 7, 2024

A parent who is qualified to obtain gainful employment cannot shirk his or her child support obligation by voluntarily remaining unemployed or underemployed, though courts must consider a parent’s right to pursue his or … Because Clark has failed to show that no evidence supports the trial court’s findings or that the trial court clearly abused its discretion, we overrule his issue on appeal. 29 U.S.C. § 206 (setting minimum wage at $7.25

Sylvano Sanchez v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 17, 2024

“Circumstantial evidence is as probative as direct evidence in establishing the guilt of an actor, and circumstantial evidence alone can be sufficient to establish guilt.” Acosta v. State, 429 S.W.3d 621, 625 (Tex. … Rather, driving while deeply fatigued or unable to stay awake would qualify as reckless conduct. Cf. Roy v. State, 509 S.W.3d 315, 319 (Tex. Crim.

Dana Francis Walcott, Jr. v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 21, 2021

“Therefore, if a question clearly calls for an objectionable response, a defendant should make an objection before the witness responds.” Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 355 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). … The constitutional right to present a complete defense “is qualified by the requirement that the evidence be relevant and not excluded by an established evidentiary rule.” Davis v.

John Cox v. Joy Cox

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 28, 2009

The parties agree that John meets the first two elements; thus we focus our analysis on whether John has established that (a) he did not participate in the hearing resulting in the judgment and (b) error is apparent on the … (appellant participated in hearing resulting in final divorce decree, but did not participate in proceedings resulting in clarification order, amended qualified domestic relations orders, and stock division order at issue

Texas San Marcos Treatment Center, L.P. D/B/A San Marcos Treatment Center v. Veronica Payton

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jan 23, 2015

statutory qualified to provide an acceptable report. … Clearly, Dr.

Joachim Osayande Osojie v. Vivian Osojie

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 28, 2009

The parties agree that John meets the first two elements; thus we focus our analysis on whether John has established that (a) he did not participate in the hearing resulting in the judgment and (b) error is apparent on … (appellant participated in hearing resulting in final divorce decree, but did not participate in proceedings resulting in clarification order, amended qualified domestic relations orders, and stock division order at issue

Tommy Adkisson, Individually, and Officially on Behalf of Bexar County, Texas, as County Commissioner Precinct 4 v. Ken Paxton, Attorney General of Texas And Hearst Newspapers, LLC

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 6, 2015

not be reasonable for the Commissioner to conclude that his communications were in all circumstances immune from scrutiny. … OR2000-3105 at n.2 (stating that state senator, as individual person, is not governmental body subject to PIA, but that her “office clearly falls within the meaning of ‘governmental body’” as defined by PIA).

Russo v. State

228 S.W.3d 779 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jun 7, 2007

For murder to qualify as capital murder in the course of a robbery, the killer’s intent to rob must be formed before or at the time of the murder. Conner, 67 S.W.3d at 197 ; Alvarado v. … We conclude that the evidence supporting the finding of guilt is not so weak as to make the finding clearly wrong or manifestly unjust, nor is the verdict against the great weight and preponderance of evidence.

Anthony Barnes v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 29, 2001

Johnson testified that he had been granted testimonial immunity; that his testimony in the instant case could not be used against him in his own trial for aggravated robbery. … The verdict or judgment is to be set aside only when the factual finding is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence so as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Clewis , 922 S.W.2d at 129 .

in Re Chance Deallen Keller

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Apr 11, 2019

that items that he wanted tested were connected to charged crime and because movant failed “to explain why exculpatory results makes 15 his story at trial clearly more … Assuming for the sake of argument that the type of information relied on by Keller can satisfy the statutory requirements and that the relief requested qualifies as testing by newer techniques, we note that the testing

Anthony Barnes v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Nov 29, 2001

Johnson testified that he had been granted testimonial immunity; that his testimony in the instant case could not be used against him in his own trial for aggravated robbery. … The verdict or judgment is to be set aside only when the factual finding is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence so as to be clearly wrong and unjust. Clewis, 922 S.W.2d at 129.

Davis v. State

169 S.W.3d 660 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · May 19, 2005

Keith Walker, a homicide detective, was qualified as an expert, and testified that strangulation by hands or by ligature could cause death. Appellant Davis was the only defense witness. … While, appellant’s version of the assault did not exactly match that of the declarant as revealed by Officer Canizales’s testimony, the evidence clearly supported the general verdict of the jury.

Kevin Simpson v. the State of Texas

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Mar 24, 2023

–Austin 1999, pet. dism’d) (involving trial court implicitly overruling defendant’s objection that witness was not qualified to answer question by instructing witness that he could answer if he knew); Leal v. … to establish guilt.”

AEP Texas North Co. v. Public Utility Commission

297 S.W.3d 435 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Oct 23, 2009

AEP Service Company (“AEPSC”), acting as the Qualified Scheduling Entity (“QSE”) on behalf of TNC and its sister company, TCC, made the inaccurate forecasts. … The record also shows that TNC had firm gas supply arrangements with terms in excess of a month at a price established pursuant to a predetermined pricing mechanism.

Allison v. Fire Insurance Exchange

98 S.W.3d 227 · Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Dec 19, 2002

Weighing all of the evidence, we cannot say that it is so weak as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain, 709 S.W.2d at 176 . … Weighing all of the evidence, we cannot say that it is so weak as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain, 709 S.W.2d at 176 .

Judd Kearl v. Texas Racing Commission

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Aug 26, 2022

If the licensee appeals the ruling to the Commission, the burden shifts to the licensee to prove that the “decision was clearly in error.” Id. § 307.67(c). … “Qualified experts may offer opinion testimony if that testimony is both relevant and based on a reliable foundation.” Gharda USA, Inc. v.

Elness Swenson Graham Architects, Inc.// RLJ II-C Austin Air, LP RLJ II-C Austin Air Lessee, LP And RLJ Lodging Fund II Acquisitions, LLC v. RLJ II-C Austin Air, LP RLJ II-C Austin Air Lessee, LP And RLJ Lodging Fund II Acquisitions, LLC// Elness Swenson Graham Architects, Inc.

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin) · Jul 16, 2015

Texas law clearly establishes that such recompense is not appropriate where, prior to any verdict or judgment, the plaintiff is fully compensated for its damages. Osbourne, S.W.3d at 75-76; Galle, 262 S.W.3d at 574. … Asfahl, the trial court understood the content of the objection, which is clearly evident in the record.