fourth and sixth factors (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

fourth and sixth factors in Texas

18 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2014–2016 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.

Followed or applied (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Gigliobianco v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2006 · cited in 15 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2014–2016
2 sentences

2015In considering the fourth and sixth factors, the tendency of the evidence to confuse or distract the jury from the main issues and the time required to develop the evidence weighs in favor of admissibility.242 “Evidence that consumes an inordinate amount of time to present or answer, for example, might 238 Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641—42; Schiele, 2015 WL 730482 , at *6. 239 Id. 240 Id. 241 Id. 242 Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641 . 53 tend to confuse or distract the jury from the main issues.”243 Here, the amount of time the State devoted to developing the evidence was not insignificant.

2015In considering the fourth and sixth factors, the tendency of the evidence to confuse or distract the jury from the main issues and the time required to develop the evidence weighs in favor of admissibility.242 “Evidence that consumes an inordinate amount of time to present or answer, for example, might 238 Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641—42; Schiele, 2015 WL 730482 , at *6. 239 Id. 240 Id. 241 Id. 242 Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641 . 53 tend to confuse or distract the jury from the main issues.”243 Here, the amount of time the State devoted to developing the evidence was not insignificant.

1215
Santellan v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1997 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015See Santellan v. State, 939 S.W.2d 155, 169 (Tex. Crim.

2015See Santellan v. State, 939 S.W.2d 155, 169 (Tex. Crim.

33
Blackwell v. Stategreen
texapp · 2006 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
2 sentences

2015Cf. Blackwell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 1, 18 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. ref’d) (factor neutral and favored neither admissibility nor exclusion of evidence where four witnesses’ testimony of extraneous offenses was not “unduly lengthy”).

2015Cf Blackwell v. State, 193 S.W.3d 1, 18 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. refd) (factor neutral and favored neither admissibility nor exclusion of evidence where four witnesses' testimony of extraneous offenses was not "unduly lengthy").

22

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TX § Tex. Penal Code § 19.03 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 18 (2014–2016) WA 4 (1991–2007) OR 2 (2025–2025)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check