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.
23 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1997–2020 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Clewis v. Statered2 sentences2015App. 2010) (plurality opinion) (4-1-4 decision), the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recognized that a factual sufficiency review is subsumed by a properly conducted legal sufficiency review and, therefore, abolished the separate factual sufficiency review test established by Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex. Crim. 2011This factual sufficiency review standard announced at that time was contrasted with that of the legal sufficiency review standard set out by the United States Supreme Court in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979): “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Clewis, 922 S.W.2d at 128-29 . | 8 | 14 |
Marshall v. Stategreen2 sentences2008See Marshall v. State , 210 S.W.3d 618, 625 (Tex. Crim. 2008See Marshall v. State, 210 S.W.3d 618, 625 (Tex. Crim.App.2006). | 3 | 3 |
Zuniga v. Statered2 sentences2006See Zuniga, 144 S.W.3d at 484-85 . 2006See Zuniga, 144 S.W.3d at 484-85 . | 2 | 2 |
Jackson v. Virginiared2 sentences2011This factual sufficiency review standard announced at that time was contrasted with that of the legal sufficiency review standard set out by the United States Supreme Court in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979): “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Clewis, 922 S.W.2d at 128-29 . 2011This factual sufficiency review standard announced at that time was contrasted with that of the legal sufficiency review standard set out by the United States Supreme Court in Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979): “whether, after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Clewis, 922 S.W.2d at 128-29 . | 1 | 2 |
Cain v. Baingreen1 sentence2020Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986) (per curiam). | 1 | 1 |
Laster v. Stategreen1 sentence2019Under that former standard, “[e]vidence that is legally sufficient . . . can be deemed factually insufficient in two ways: (1) the evidence supporting the conviction is ‘too weak’ to support the factfinder’s verdict, or (2) considering conflicting evidence, the factfinder’s verdict is against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence.” Laster v. State, 275 S.W.3d 512, 518 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
In Re King's Estategreen2 sentences2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. 2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. | 1 | 1 |
Herbert v. Herbertgreen2 sentences2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. 2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. | 1 | 1 |
Pool v. Ford Motor Co.red2 sentences2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. 2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. | 1 | 1 |
Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jacksongreen2 sentences2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. 2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. | 1 | 1 |
In Re CHgreen2 sentences2002See In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17, 25 (Tex.2002) (discussing various courts of appeals decisions attempting to define the factual sufficiency review standard when clear and convincing evidence is required). 2002See In re C.H., 89 S.W.3d 17, 25 (Tex.2002) (discussing various courts of appeals decisions attempting to define the factual sufficiency review standard when clear and convincing evidence is required). | 1 | 1 |
Santellan v. Stategreen1 sentence1999A clearly Avrong and unjust verdict may occur in instances where the jury’s finding is “manifestly unjust,” “shocks the conscience,” or “clearly demonstrates bias.” Santellan v. State, 939 S.W.2d 155, 164 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Richardson v. State
green
2 sentences2004In Richardson v. State, 973 S.W.2d 384 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1998, no pet.), the Fifth Court of Appeals noted that Geesa’s rejection of the “reasonable hypothesis analytical construct” preceded the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals’ adoption of a factual sufficiency review standard in Clewis v. State, 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). 2004In Richardson v. State , 973 S.W.2d 384 (Tex. App.—Dallas 1998, no pet.), the Fifth Court of Appeals noted that Geesa 's rejection of the "reasonable hypothesis analytical construct" preceded the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals' adoption of a factual sufficiency review standard in Clewis v. State , 922 S.W.2d 126 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2004–2004 |
Malik v. State
green
1 sentence2008Therefore, I concur with the majority’s judgment, but not its reasoning. . 953 S.W.2d 234 (Tex.Crim.App.1997). . | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Jackson v. Golden Eagle Archery, Inc.
green
2 sentences2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. 2003NOTES [1] 715 S.W.2d 629, 635 (Tex.1986). [2] 29 S.W.3d 925 . [3] Golden Eagle Archery, Inc. v. Jackson, 24 S.W.3d 362, 364 (Tex.2000). [4] Id. at 375 . [5] Id. [6] 29 S.W.3d at 929 . [7] Pool v. Ford Motor Co., 715 S.W.2d 629, 634-35 (Tex.1986); see also Herbert v. Herbert, 754 S.W.2d 141, 144 (Tex.1988) (plurality opinion); Id. at 145 (Phillips, C.J., concurring); In re King's Estate, 150 Tex. 662 , 244 S.W.2d 660, 661 (1951). [8] Pool, 715 S.W.2d at 635 . [9] Jones v. Tarrant Util. | 1 | 2003–2003 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.