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.
21 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 2008–2024 7 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 |
|---|---|---|
Villarreal, Rene Danielgreen2 sentences2024In reviewing the state of the evidence, we must consider not only the extent to which the parties contested and presented evidence on the relevant issue but also the weight and “plausibility of the evidence raising the defense.” Lozano, 636 S.W.3d at 29 (analyzing egregious harm due to erroneous inclusion of instructions on duty to retreat); see Villarreal v. State, 453 S.W.3d 429, 437 (Tex. Crim. 2024In examining the evidence, we must consider 30 “the plausibility of the evidence raising the defense.” Villarreal v. State, 453 S.W.3d 429, 436 (Tex. Crim. | 7 | 11 |
Posey v. Stategreen2 sentences2015On the contrary, a curated trial strategy is a hallmark of professional assistance. “[T]he lawyer and the client could decide not to request the defensive issue and risk losing their credibility with the jury because the evidence raising the defense is so unworthy of belief.” Posey, 966 S.W.2d at 61, 63 . 2014In Posey, the Court reasoned that a decision by the defendant and his counsel not to request an instruction on the mistake-of-fact defense could have been based on their desire to “avoid losing their credibility with the jury because the evidence raising the defense is so unworthy of belief.” 966 S.W.2d at 63 . | 3 | 4 |
Allen v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Rather, “it is appropriate to consider the plausibility of the evidence raising the defense, as at least one factor among others.” Allen v. State, 253 S.W.3d 260 , 267–68 (Tex. Crim. 2015See Allen, 253 S.W.3d at 267-68 (observing, with respect to an egregious-harm analysis pertaining to a defensive theory, that “it is appropriate to consider the plausibility of the evidence raising the defense” as at least one factor in deciding whether egregious harm exists). | 2 | 4 |
Almanza v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See id. 2010See id. | 2 | 2 |
Dickey v. Stategreen1 sentence2008The uncontested circumstances immediately surrounding the assault itself do not strongly suggest either that the complainant genuinely desired to be struck, or that the 28 See Dickey v. State, 22 S.W.3d 490, 492 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hollander, Joe Shawn
green
1 sentence2021“In an egregious-harm analysis, the question is not simply whether, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the jury could rationally have found predicate facts to a level of confidence beyond a reasonable doubt.” Hollander, 414 S.W.3d at 751 . “[A] reviewing court must evaluate the likelihood, considering the record as a whole, that a properly instructed jury would have found the predicate facts to the requisite level of confidence.” Id.; see Villarreal, 453 S.W.3d at 436 (providing that an appellate court must “properly consider the plausibility of the evidence raising the de | 1 | 2021–2021 |
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.