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.
19 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2023 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Robinson v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Robinson, 851 S.W.2d at 230. ―When determining whether the State sufficiently rebutted the presumption of harm, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling and defer to the trial court’s resolution of historical facts and its determinations concerning credibility and demeanor.‖ Ocon, 284 S.W.3d at 884 . 2012Robinson, 851 S.W.2d at 230 . ‘When determining whether the State sufficiently rebutted the presumption of harm, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling and defer to the trial court’s resolution of historical facts and its determinations concerning credibility and demeanor.” Ocon, 284 S.W.3d at 884 . | 2 | 3 |
Ocon v. Stategreen2 sentences2020As we held in Duke, “[w]hen determining whether the State sufficiently rebutted the presumption of harm, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling and defer to the trial court’s resolution of historical facts and its determinations concerning credibility and demeanor.” Id. (citing Ocon, 284 S.W.3d at 884 ). 2015"When determining whether the State sufficiently rebutted the presumption of harm, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court's ruling and defer to the trial court's resolution of historical -8- facts and its determination concerning credibility and demeanor." Id. | 1 | 11 |
Quinn v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Quinn v. State, 958 S.W.2d 395 , 401–02 (Tex. Crim. 2021Bokemeyer, 355 S.W.3d at 204 (citing Quinn v. State, 958 S.W.2d 395, 401-02 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 6 |
Thomas v. Stategreen2 sentences1997Robinson, 851 S.W.2d at 230 (juror who received prejudicial information from sister testified that the statement would not influence her in reaching a verdict and that she had not communicated such information to the other jurors); Thomas, 699 S.W.2d at 853-854 (juror who overheard conversation between third parties relating to the case testified that the conversation did not influence him at all in reaching a verdict or deciding punishment and that he did not tell anyone else about the statement). 1997Robinson, 851 S.W.2d at 230 (juror who received prejudicial information from sister testified that the statement would not influence her in reaching a verdict and that she had not communicated such information to the other jurors); Thomas, 699 S.W.2d at 853-854 (juror who overheard conversation between third parties relating to the case testified that the conversation did not influence him at all in reaching a verdict or deciding punishment and that he did not tell anyone else about the statement). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jenkins v. State
green
1 sentence2023Id. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Brad Lyle Bokemeyer v. State
green
1 sentence2021Bokemeyer, 355 S.W.3d at 204 (citing Quinn v. State, 958 S.W.2d 395, 401-02 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Duke v. State
green
1 sentence2020As we held in Duke, “[w]hen determining whether the State sufficiently rebutted the presumption of harm, we view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial court’s ruling and defer to the trial court’s resolution of historical facts and its determinations concerning credibility and demeanor.” Id. (citing Ocon, 284 S.W.3d at 884 ). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
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.