Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
32 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1987–2021 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Plas-Tex, Inc. v. U.S. Steel Corp.green2 sentences2008Plas-Tex, Inc. v. U.S. Steel Corp., 772 S.W.2d 442, 445 (Tex.1989). 2008Plas-Tex, Inc. v. U.S. Steel Corp. , 772 S.W.2d 442, 445 (Tex. 1989). | 11 | 11 |
Sosa v. City of Balch Springsgreen2 sentences1995Sosa v. City of Balch Springs, 772 S.W.2d 71, 72 (Tex.1989). 1994Sosa v. City of Balch Springs, 772 S.W.2d 71, 72 (Tex.1989); Plas-Tex, Inc. v. United States Steel Corp., 772 S.W.2d 442, 445 (Tex.1989). | 2 | 2 |
Hernandez v. Stategreen1 sentence2021When reviewing for evidentiary sufficiency, “evidence is considered sufficient to support a conviction when, after considering all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a reviewing court concludes that any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” Hernandez v. State, 556 S.W.3d 308, 315 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
cluster 22507green2 sentences2001United States v. Sprick, 233 F.3d 845, 853 (5th Cir.2000)(footnotes omitted); see also Tsinhnahijinnie, 112 F.3d at 991 (analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court stated that variance is immaterial where it is "`not of a character which could have misled the defendant at the trial' and there is no danger of double jeopardy") (citations omitted); Woods v. State, 244 Ga.App. 359 , 535 S.E.2d 524, 525 (2000)(analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court said proper inquiry focuses on materiality: allegations must sufficiently inform defendant of charges against him so as to enable him to pr 2001United States v. Sprick, 233 F.3d 845, 853 (5th Cir.2000)(footnotes omitted); see also Tsinhnahijinnie, 112 F.3d at 991 (analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court stated that variance is immaterial where it is “ ‘not of a character which could have misled the defendant at the trial’ and there is no danger of double jeopardy”) (citations omitted); Woods v. State, 244 Ga.App. 359 , 535 S.E.2d 524, 525 (2000)(analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court said proper inquiry focuses on materiality: allegations must sufficiently inform defendant of charges against him so as to enable him to p | 1 | 1 |
Woods v. Stategreen2 sentences2001United States v. Sprick, 233 F.3d 845, 853 (5th Cir.2000)(footnotes omitted); see also Tsinhnahijinnie, 112 F.3d at 991 (analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court stated that variance is immaterial where it is “ ‘not of a character which could have misled the defendant at the trial’ and there is no danger of double jeopardy”) (citations omitted); Woods v. State, 244 Ga.App. 359 , 535 S.E.2d 524, 525 (2000)(analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court said proper inquiry focuses on materiality: allegations must sufficiently inform defendant of charges against him so as to enable him to p 2001United States v. Sprick, 233 F.3d 845, 853 (5th Cir.2000)(footnotes omitted); see also Tsinhnahijinnie, 112 F.3d at 991 (analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court stated that variance is immaterial where it is “ ‘not of a character which could have misled the defendant at the trial’ and there is no danger of double jeopardy”) (citations omitted); Woods v. State, 244 Ga.App. 359 , 535 S.E.2d 524, 525 (2000)(analyzing variance claim under Jackson , court said proper inquiry focuses on materiality: allegations must sufficiently inform defendant of charges against him so as to enable him to p | 1 | 1 |
Castillo v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Castillo v. State, 913 S.W.2d 529, n. 3 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (plurality opinion); see also Munoz, supra. By ignoring the caselaw discussed in this opinion, it seems the majority intends to overrule it sub silentio. [4] *469 I cannot guess at the majority's motivation to today render an insufficiency of the evidence claim under the accomplice witness rule divorced from any federal constitutional principles. 1999Castillo v. State, 913 S.W.2d 529, n. 3 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (plurality opinion); see also Munoz, supra. By ignoring the caselaw discussed in this opinion, it seems the majority intends to overrule it sub silentio. 4 I cannot guess at the majority’s motivation to today render an insufficiency of the evidence claim under the accomplice witness rule divorced from any federal constitutional principles. | 1 | 1 |
Munoz v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Castillo v. State, 913 S.W.2d 529, n. 3 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (plurality opinion); see also Munoz, supra. By ignoring the caselaw discussed in this opinion, it seems the majority intends to overrule it sub silentio. [4] *469 I cannot guess at the majority's motivation to today render an insufficiency of the evidence claim under the accomplice witness rule divorced from any federal constitutional principles. 1999Castillo v. State, 913 S.W.2d 529, n. 3 (Tex.Crim.App.1995) (plurality opinion); see also Munoz, supra. By ignoring the caselaw discussed in this opinion, it seems the majority intends to overrule it sub silentio. 4 I cannot guess at the majority’s motivation to today render an insufficiency of the evidence claim under the accomplice witness rule divorced from any federal constitutional principles. | 1 | 1 |
Engstrom v. First National Bank of Eagle Lakegreen2 sentences1998Bank, 936 S.W.2d 438, 445 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, writ denied.) If there is some evidence supporting the finding, we then review the insufficiency of the evidence claim. 1998Bank, 936 S.W.2d 438, 445 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1997, writ denied.) If there is some evidence supporting the finding, we then review the insufficiency of the evidence claim. | 1 | 1 |
Jaffe Aircraft Corp. v. Carrgreen1 sentence1997See Jaffe Aircraft Corp. v. Carr, 867 S.W.2d 27, 29 (Tex.1993). | 1 | 1 |
Valdez v. Stategreen1 sentence1992The standard of review for an insufficiency of the evidence claim as to special issue two is the same as set forth in our disposition of the preceding point of error; that is, whether the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, would lead any rational trier of fact to find beyond a reasonable doubt that the answer to the special issue is “yes.” Valdez v. State, 776 S.W.2d 162, 166 (Tex.Cr.App.1989). | 1 | 1 |
Croucher v. Crouchergreen1 sentence1990See Croucher, 660 S.W.2d at 58 .) Hence, we deem the appropriate standard of review is an insufficiency of the evidence standard. | 1 | 1 |
Burks v. Stategreen1 sentence1989Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 320 , 99 S.Ct. 2781, 2789-90 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); Burks v. State, 693 S.W.2d 932, 937 (Tex.Crim.App.1985). | 1 | 1 |
James v. Stategreen2 sentences1987In James v. State, 538 S.W.2d 414, 416 (Tex.Crim.App. 1976), the Court described corroborating evidence as that "which tends to connect the defendant with the offense in order to support a conviction" based on such testimony. 1987In James v. State, 538 S.W.2d 414, 416 (Tex.Crim.App. 1976), the Court described corroborating evidence as that “which tends to connect the defendant with the offense in order to support a conviction” based on such testimony. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jackson v. Virginia
red
2 sentences2015Applicant's evidence establising an insufficiency-of-the-evidence standard equivalent to that of Jackson vi Virgina, 443 U.S. 307 (1979); the logic of presentation of the evidence, newly discovered and suppressed evidence is tomnake clear, the Applicant evidence, if presented to the jury and used properly would have established that a fact finder would not have found this applicant 'guilty of attempted theft. 4 l However, the Glerk' S Record, which is part of the habeas record and the ' same should be made part, contain no complaint by Western World Insurance Group and that along that state di 2015The suppressed evidencs, the state knew existed andaello&@ it to go uncorrected_. _5_ V Applicant's evidence establising an insufficiency-of-the-evidence standard equivalent to that of Jackson vi Virgina, 443 U.S. 307 (1979), the logic of presentation of the evidencs, newly discovered and suppressed evidence is toomake clear, the Applicant evidence, if presented to the jury and used properly would have established that a fact finder would not have found this applicant guilty of attempted theft. | 4 | 1989–2015 |
Wesbrook v. State
green
2 sentences2020Id. 2019Id. | 3 | 2019–2020 |
Gilgon, Inc. v. Hart
green
2 sentences2003Id. at 569-70 . 2003Id. at 569-70 . | 2 | 2003–2003 |
State v. Herndon
green
1 sentence2021Moreover, Gallien never indicated in his motion or at the hearing that he was relying on Juror No. 32’s note to support an insufficiency-of-the-evidence claim, nor did he “at any point, advance a claim that the evidence admitted was insufficient to sustain a guilty verdict.” See id. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
In Re King's Estate
green
1 sentence2004Id. | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Lehman v. State
green
2 sentences2001Although this Court has suggested in at least one case that variance law is not a type of an insufficiency of the evidence claim, Lehman v. State, 792 S.W.2d 82 (Tex.Crim.App.1990)(criticizing statement in another case as "confusing because it blurs the variance concept with the related but distinct notion of insufficient evidence"), we have nonetheless continued to treat variance as an evidentiary sufficiency issue under Jackson and Burks . 2001Although this Court has suggested in at least one case that variance law is not a type of an insufficiency of the evidence claim, Lehman v. State, 792 S.W.2d 82 (Tex.Crim.App.1990)(criticizing statement in another case as "confusing because it blurs the variance concept with the related but distinct notion of insufficient evidence”), we have nonetheless continued to treat variance as an evidentiary sufficiency issue under Jackson and Burks . | 1 | 2001–2001 |
Lofton v. Texas Brine Corp.
green
1 sentence1995Lofton v. Texas Brine Corp., 720 S.W.2d 804 (Tex.1986). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.