Jones v. State (1969)
green
· 79 citation events
across 3 courts.
Showing the 11 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
197119982026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Gribble v. State (1991)
See e.g., Sullivan, supra; Flores, supra; Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1969); and Vanderbilt, supra, at 716 .
green
Earvin v. State (1982)
Consistent with the Ysasaga formulation is Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702-03 (Tex.Cr.App.1969), in which Judge Onion comments that appellant’s counsel had argued before the jury and again on appeal “a number of possibilities or suppositions they draw from the evidence,” but he dismisses them as follows: “These are all matters which go to the weight to be given the evidence, and in determining the sufficiency of the evidence it must be viewed in the light most favorable …
green
Guerra v. State (1985)
See e.g., Sullivan v. State, supra; Flores v. State, supra; Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.Crim.App.1969) cer t. denied, 397 U.S. 958 , 90 S.Ct. 967 , 25 L.Ed.2d 143 (1970).
green
Taylor v. State (1983)
See, for example, Hooker v. State, 621 S.W.2d 597, 601 (Tex.Cr.App.1980) (opinion on appellant’s motion for rehearing); Vaughn v. State, 607 S.W.2d 914, 919 (Tex.Cr.App.1980); Brasfield v. State, 600 S.W.2d 288, 290 (Tex.Cr.App.1980); Miller v. State, 566 S.W.2d 614, 617 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); Carlisle v. State, 549 S.W.2d 698, 703 (Tex.Cr.App.1977); and Brown v. State, 475 S.W.2d 938, 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1971); Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1969).
green
Daniel v. State (1983)
Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, as we must (Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 [Tex.Cr.App.1969], cert. denied 397 U.S. 958 , 90 S.Ct. 967 , 25 L.Ed.2d 143 [1970]), we find that the evidence is sufficient to support the jury verdict and the judgment of guilty.
green
Burks v. State (1982)
Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1969).
green
Weir v. State (1974)
Considering, as we must, the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 702 (Tex.Cr.App.1969), we find the evidence sufficient to support the conviction.
green
Cunningham v. State (1972)
See Brown v. State, 475 S.W.2d 938, 951 (Tex.Cr.App.1972); Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698, 703 (Tex.Cr.App.1969). 2 As pointed out in People v. W., 24 N.Y. 2d 732 , 302 N.Y.S.2d 260 , 249 N.E.2d 882 (1969), which involved an almost identical question, “. . . [t]he questioning of the appellant was hardly the sort of incommunicado, police-dominated atmosphere of *120 custodial interrogation and overbearing of the subject’s will at which the Miranda rule was aimed. . “. . .
green
Criner v. State (1992)
See Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698 (Tex.Crim.App.1969), cert, denied, 397 U.S. 958 , 90 S.Ct. 967 , 25 L.Ed.2d 143 (1970).
green
Armstrong v. State (1976)
See also Jones v. State, 442 S.W.2d 698 (Tex.Crim.App.1969), cert. den. 397 U.S. 958 , 90 S.Ct. 967 , 25 L.Ed.2d 143 ; White v. State, 478 S.W.2d 506 (Tex.Crim.App.1972); Cleaver v. State, 498 S.W.2d 945 (Tex.Crim.App.1973); Provost v. State, 514 S.W.2d 269 (Tex.Crim.App. 1974).
green
Brown v. State (1971)
See Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 442 S.W.2d 698, 703 , and cases there cited.