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 2015–2025 8 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 |
|---|---|---|
Butcher, Charles E. Iigreen2 sentences2025Butcher, 454 S.W.3d at 20 (citing Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 671 ). 2023Id.; Butcher, 454 S.W.3d at 20 (citing Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 670 ). | 8 | 11 |
Matlock, Marcus Dewaynegreen2 sentences2015“In a factual-sufficiency review of a finding rejecting an affirmative defense, and unlike in a legal-sufficiency review, courts examine the evidence in a neutral light.” Id. (citing Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 671 ). 2015“In a factual-sufficiency review of a finding rejecting an affirmative defense, and unlike in a legal-sufficiency review, courts examine the evidence in a neutral light.” Id. (citing Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 671 ). | 2 | 15 |
Bourland, Heflin, Alvarez, Minor & Matthews, PLC v. Rodney Heaton and Margaret Heaton and Loeb Propertiesgreen1 sentence2025See id.; Matlock, 393 S.W.3d at 671. | 1 | 1 |
Harrell v. Stategreen1 sentence2015“A finding rejecting a defendant’s affirmative defense cannot be overruled unless, ‘after setting out the relevant evidence supporting the verdict, the court clearly states why the verdict is so much against the great weight of the evidence as to be manifestly unjust, conscience-shocking, or clearly biased.’ ” Id. (citing Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 670 ). 3.Evidence Required by Defendant Section 20.04 requires proof the accused “performed ‘some overt and affirmative act’ which brought home to his victim that she had been ‘fully released from captivity.’ ” Harrell v. State, 65 S.W.3d 768, 772 (Tex. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. State
green
2 sentences2023Id. (citing Matlock v. State, 392 S.W.3d 662, 667 (Tex. Crim. 2021Smith, 355 S.W.3d at 148 ; Matlock, 392 S.W.3d at 671 . | 2 | 2021–2023 |
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.