125 Texas opinions name it 4 courts 1974–2024 12 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thompson v. Stategreen2 sentences2013In order to overcome this presumption, “[t]he record must be sufficiently developed.” In re J.W., 113 S.W.3d 605 , 616 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2003, no pet.) (op. on remand) (citing Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 814 (Tex. Crim. 2013Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689 ; Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. | 9 | 9 |
Watson v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Watson v. State , 204 S.W.3d 404, 417 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006). 2010Watson v. State, 204 S.W.3d 404, 417 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006). | 7 | 7 |
Hall v. Stategreen2 sentences2016The second part of the analysis requires a determination of whether there is evidence that supports giving the instruction to the jury. “‘A defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser-included offense where the proof for the offense charged includes the proof necessary to establish the lesser-included offense and there is some evidence in the record that would permit a jury rationally to find that if the defendant is guilty, he is guilty only of the lesser-included offense.’” Hall v. State, 225 S.W.3d 524 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007, reh’g denied) (citing Bignall v. State, 887 S.W.2d 21 , 23 T 2015The availability of a lesser-included instruction in a given case still would depend on the second step, whether there is some evidence adduced at trial to support such an instruction.” Hall v. State, 225 S.W.3d 524, 535 (Tex. Crim. | 6 | 12 |
Mitich v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Mitich v. State, 47 S.W.3d 137, 141 (Tex.App.Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (citing Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex.Crim.App.1999)). 2010Mitich v. State , 47 S.W.3d 137, 141 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2001, no pet.) (citing Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. | 5 | 5 |
Wichita County, Texas v. Hartgreen2 sentences2010See id. at 784-85 . 2010See id. at 784-85 . | 3 | 3 |
Austin v. Stategreen2 sentences2006Harnett, 38 S.W.3d at 658 ; Austin v. State, 794 S.W.2d 408, 410 (Tex.App.- Austin 1990 , pet. ref d). [I]f the witness perceived events and formed an opinion that a reasonable person could draw from the facts then the first part of the rule is met. 2006Harnett, 38 S.W.3d at 658 ; Austin v. State, 794 S.W.2d 408, 410 (Tex. App.— Austin 1990 , pet. ref’d). [I]f the witness perceived events and formed an opinion that a reasonable person could draw from the facts then the first part of the rule is met. | 3 | 3 |
Nava, Andres Maldonadogreen2 sentences2016To satisfy the first part of the test, the defendant must show counsel’s performance fell below “the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases as reflected by prevailing professional norms [.]” Nava v. State, 415 S.W.3d 289, 307 (Tex. Crim. 2016To satisfy the first part of the test, the defendant must show counsel’s performance fell below “the range of competence demanded of attorneys in criminal cases as reflected by prevailing professional norms [.]” Nava v. State, 415 S.W.3d 289, 307 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 3 |
Osbourn v. Stategreen2 sentences2023Osbourn v. State, 9 92 S.W.3d 531, 538 (Tex. Crim. 2021Osbourn v. State, 92 S.W.3d 531, 538 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Cox, Kenyon Gradygreen2 sentences2016See Cox, 389 S.W.3d at 819 . 2016See Cox, 389 S.W.3d at 819 . | 2 | 2 |
State Ex Rel. Rosenthal v. Poegreen2 sentences2009Rosenthal v. Poe , 98 S.W.3d 194, 198 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003)(orig. proceeding), quoting Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals , 34 S.W.3d 924 , 927-28 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001)(orig. proceeding). 2009Rosenthal v. Poe, 98 S.W.3d 194, 198 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003)(orig. proceeding), quoting Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 34 S.W.3d 924 , 927-28 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001)(orig. proceeding). | 2 | 2 |
Yanez v. Stategreen2 sentences2008State , 187 S.W.3d 724, 740 (Tex. App.-Corpus Christi 2006, pet. ref'd) (citing Adanandus v . 2008We have previously recognized that involuntary manslaughter is a lesser-included offense of capital murder, we therefore conclude that the first part of the test for determining whether a defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser offense is satisfied. see Yanez v. State, 187 S.W.3d 724, 740 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 2006, pet. ref’d) (citing Adanandus v. State, 866 S.W.2d 210 , 232 n.21 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
In Re Triplex Marine Maintenance, Inc.green2 sentences2007Inc., 258 B.R. at 669 (holding that the first part of the test was met by the inclusion of the following language in the lease in capital letters under the heading of “Important Conditions” that: “YOU [the debtor] UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT: (A) THE LEASE CANNOT BE CANCELED BY YOU AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON....”). 2007Inc., 258 B.R. at 669 (holding that the first part of the test was met by the inclusion of the following language in the lease in capital letters under the heading of "Important Conditions" that: "YOU [the debtor] UNDERSTAND AND AGREE THAT: (A) THE LEASE CANNOT BE CANCELED BY YOU AT ANY TIME FOR ANY REASON. . . . "). | 2 | 2 |
Benson, Yusulf Shaheedgreen2 sentences2024“The first part of the analysis is purely a question of statutory construction and generally requires ascertaining the focus or gravamen of the offense.” Id. at 73-74 . 2024“The second part requires an examination of the trial record, which can include the evidence presented at trial.” Id. at 74 . 1. | 1 | 4 |
TransAmerican Natural Gas Corp. v. Powellgreen2 sentences2021Powell, 811 S.W.2d at 917 ; see also Am. 2018Powell, 811 S.W.2d at 917 ; see also American Flood Research, Inc., 192 S.W.3d at 583 . | 1 | 3 |
Adanandus v. Stategreen2 sentences2008We have previously recognized that involuntary manslaughter is a lesser-included offense of capital murder, we therefore conclude that the first part of the test for determining whether a defendant is entitled to an instruction on a lesser offense is satisfied. see Yanez v. State, 187 S.W.3d 724, 740 (Tex. App.–Corpus Christi 2006, pet. ref’d) (citing Adanandus v. State, 866 S.W.2d 210 , 232 n.21 (Tex. Crim. 2001Adanandus v. State, 866 S.W.2d 210, 232 (Tex.Crim.App.1993). | 1 | 2 |
Aranda v. Insurance Co. of North Americagreen2 sentences1994Id. at 213 . [emphasis in original] The first part of the test requires an objective determination of whether a reasonable workers’ compensation carrier under similar circumstances, would have denied or delayed payment. 1994Id. at 213 . [emphasis in original] The first part of the test requires an objective determination of whether a reasonable workers' compensation carrier under similar circumstances, would have denied or delayed payment. | 1 | 2 |
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality v. Abbottgreen1 sentence2024Id. at 674. | 1 | 1 |
Gamino, Cesar Alejandrogreen1 sentence2023A defendant is entitled to a self-defense jury instruction when the issue is raised by the evidence, “whether that evidence is strong or weak, unimpeached or contradicted, and regardless of what the trial court may think about the credibility of the defense.” Gamino v. State, 537 S.W.3d 507, 510 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Carter v. Stategreen2 sentences2023There is a two-part test for determining when an extraneous offense is admissible for proof of identity: (1) identity is a contested issue in the case, and (2) “something unique exists that connects the extraneous offense to the charged offense—some distinguishing characteristic common to both the extraneous offense and the offense charged.” Id. (internal quotation omitted). –19– Appellant confirms that at trial, “the Defense focused on contesting identity,” satisfying the first part of the test. 2023See id. | 1 | 1 |
Crowson v. Wakehamgreen1 sentence2022Crowson v. Wakeham, 897 S.W.2d 779, 783 (Tex. 1995). 4 Sales of estate property fall under the first part of this test because “the legislature has created a comprehensive statutory scheme to govern this phase of the proceedings” and its appealability. | 1 | 1 |
Texas Employment Commission v. Haysgreen1 sentence2021Because the TWC’s conclusion is supported by substantial evidence, “it is immaterial that it may have proceeded to the conclusion on an erroneous theory or may have given an unsound reason for reaching it.” Tex. Emp’t Comm’n v. Hays, 360 S.W.2d 525, 527 (Tex. 1962). | 1 | 1 |
| University of Texas Medical School at Houston v. Thangreen | 1 | 1 |
| Cohen v. Rami Bargreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wasylina v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| American Flood Research, Inc. v. Jonesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Fairow v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Vanderbeek v. San Jacinto Methodist Hospitalgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Vick v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ex Parte Hawkinsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ex Parte Cavazosgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Denton, Ex Parte William Charlesgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Maryland v. Craiggreen | 1 | 1 |
| Jackson v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| LaSalle v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| In Re KKgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Fuentes v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| In Re DJCgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Goodwin v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Guzman v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Godsey v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Davis v. State
green
2 sentences2024Davis, 947 S.W.2d at 242–43. 2022Davis, 947 S.W.2d at 242–43. | 11 | 2013–2024 |
Harnett v. State
green
2 sentences2006Harnett, 38 S.W.3d at 658 ; Austin v. State, 794 S.W.2d 408, 410 (Tex.App.- Austin 1990 , pet. ref d). [I]f the witness perceived events and formed an opinion that a reasonable person could draw from the facts then the first part of the rule is met. 2006Harnett, 38 S.W.3d at 658 ; Austin v. State, 794 S.W.2d 408, 410 (Tex. App.— Austin 1990 , pet. ref’d). [I]f the witness perceived events and formed an opinion that a reasonable person could draw from the facts then the first part of the rule is met. | 3 | 2006–2006 |
Terry v. Ohio
green
2 sentences2018“The first part of the analysis is to determine whether the officer’s action at its inception was reasonable.” Id. (citing Terry, 392 U.S. at 16–17). 2018“The first part of the analysis is to determine whether the officer’s action at its inception was reasonable.” Id. (citing Terry, 392 U.S. at 16–17). | 2 | 2016–2018 |
Strickland v. Washington
green
2 sentences2013Strickland, 466 U.S. at 689 ; Thompson v. State, 9 S.W.3d 808, 813 (Tex. Crim. 1987Or, the proposition that counsel's performance was so deficient that he "was not functioning as the `counsel' guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment," Id. 104 S.Ct. at 2064 , simply asserts the very point it establishes in the conclusion. [see: Brooks, et al, Modern Rhetoric, 3rd ed. (Harcourt, Brace, & World: New York, 1958), p. 221] Although the statement appears to establish its conclusion it fails to do so; thus, it is fallacious. | 2 | 1987–2013 |
State v. Mendoza
green
2 sentences2012Id. 2012Id. | 2 | 2012–2012 |
Taylor v. State
green
2 sentences2011Taylor, 268 S.W.3d at 589 . 2011Taylor , 268 S.W.3d at 589 . | 2 | 2011–2011 |
Whittington v. City of Austin
green
2 sentences2010Id. at 897 . 2010Id. at 897 . | 2 | 2010–2010 |
State Ex Rel. Hill v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth District
green
2 sentences2009Rosenthal v. Poe , 98 S.W.3d 194, 198 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003)(orig. proceeding), quoting Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals , 34 S.W.3d 924 , 927-28 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001)(orig. proceeding). 2009Rosenthal v. Poe, 98 S.W.3d 194, 198 (Tex.Crim.App. 2003)(orig. proceeding), quoting Hill v. Fifth Court of Appeals, 34 S.W.3d 924 , 927-28 (Tex.Crim.App. 2001)(orig. proceeding). | 2 | 2009–2009 |
Balderas v. State
green
1 sentence2022The procedure may also “be impermissibly suggestive if the suspect is the only individual in the array who closely resembles the pre-procedure description.” Balderas, 517 S.W.3d at 794 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
| Board of Regents of State Colleges v. Roth green | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Bignall v. State green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Graham v. Prochaska green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Speights, Billy Wayne green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Gonzales v. State green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Carpenter v. Cimarron Hydrocarbons Corp. green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Chrysler Corp. v. Honorable Robert Blackmon green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Missouri v. Hunter green | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Marx v. State green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Gonzales v. State green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| In Re JW green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| In Re MS green | 1 | 2013–2013 |
| Cardenas v. State green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Ornelas v. United States green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Schmerber v. California green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Davidow v. Inwood North Professional Group—Phase I green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Rodriguez v. Gonzales green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Curtis & Windham Architects, Inc. v. Williams green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| United States v. John Louis Iron Shell, Jr. green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Barley v. State green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
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.
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.