raised defense in Texas

2020Once the defendant produces such evidence, the State then bears the burden of persuasion “to disprove the raised defense.” Fininen, 2016 Tex. App. LEXIS 11595 , at *8 (citing Zuliani, 97 S.W.3d at 594 ; Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 913-14 ).

2016Once the defendant produces such evidence, the State then bears the burden of persuasion “to disprove the raised defense.” Zuliani, 97 S.W.3d at 594 ; Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 913–14.

2026Generally, if the defendant produces some evidence to support his claim of self-defense, the State has “the burden of persuasion to disprove the raised defense.” Zuliani v. State, 97 S.W.3d 589, 594 (Tex. Crim.

2026If the defendant produces some evidence supporting his self-defense claim, the State has “the burden of persuasion to disprove the raised defense.” Zuliani, 97 S.W.3d at 594 .

2015Once the defendant produces some evidence supporting his defense, the state then bears the burden of persuasion to “disprove the raised defense.” Zuliani, 97 S.W.3d at 594 ; see also Tidmore v. State, 976 S.W.2d 724, 729 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1998, pet. ref’d) (state does not have burden of producing evidence to affirmatively refute self-defense).

2015Once the defendant produces some evidence supporting his defense, the state then bears the burden of persuasion to “disprove the raised defense.” Zuliani, 97 S.W.3d at 594 ; see also Tidmore v. State, 976 S.W.2d 724, 729 (Tex. App.—Tyler 1998, pet. ref’d) (state does not have burden of producing evidence to affirmatively refute self-defense).

2025Braughton v. State, 569 S.W.3d 592, 608 (Tex. Crim.

2023Braughton, 569 S.W.3d at 608 . –5– If the defendant produces some evidence, the State has the burden of persuasion to disprove the raised defense.

2025Id. 23 A presumption that favors the defendant must be submitted to the jury “if there is sufficient evidence of the facts that give rise to the presumption . . . unless the court is satisfied that the evidence as a whole clearly precludes a finding beyond a reasonable doubt of the presumed fact[.]” Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 2.05 (b)(1); Morales v. State, 357 S.W.3d 1, 7 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011).

2015Morales v. State, 357 S.W.3d 1, 7 (Tex.Cr.App. 2011).

2019The court agreed, holding that when the nephews presented some evidence of a fiduciary relationship—i.e., Stawarczik’s appointment as attorney-in-fact on the same day as the will’s execution— 9 The court does not make clear in Danford who Stawarczik was to the deceased, other than that he was not her husband or child. 550 S.W.3d at 278 n.2. 11 this raised a presumption of undue influence sufficient to defeat Stawarczik’s no- evidence motion.10 Id. at 285-86.

2019The court agreed, holding that when the nephews presented some evidence of a fiduciary relationship—i.e., Stawarczik’s appointment as attorney-in-fact on the same day as the will’s execution— 9 The court does not make clear in Danford who Stawarczik was to the deceased, other than that he was not her husband or child. 550 S.W.3d at 278 n.2. 11 this raised a presumption of undue influence sufficient to defeat Stawarczik’s no- evidence motion.10 Id. at 285-86.

2013“The burden of persuasion is not one that requires the production of evidence, rather it requires only that the State prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id.; see Muhammad v. State, 911 S.W.2d 823, 828 (Tex.App.-Texarkana 1995, no pet.).

2002When a defendant challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence to support rejection of a defense such as self-defense , we examine all of the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict to determine whether a rational jury could have found the accused guilty of all essential elements of the offense beyond a reasonable doubt and also could have found against appellant on the self-defense issue beyond a reasonable doubt. Â See Saxton, 804 S.W.2d at 914 . Â In conducting our review of the legal sufficiency of the evidence, we do not reevaluate the weight and credibility of the evidence