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.
16 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Yarborough v. Gentrygreen2 sentences2024We next consider whether appellant’s trial counsel’s waiver of closing argument constituted ineffective assistance. “[C]ounsel has wide latitude in deciding how best to represent a client, and deference to counsel’s tactical decisions in his closing presentation is particularly important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategy at that stage.” Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1 , 5–6 (2003). 2021“The right to effective assistance extends to closing arguments.” Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1, 5 (2003). “[C]ounsel has wide latitude in deciding how best to represent a client, and deference to counsel’s tactical decisions in his closing presentation is particularly important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategy at that stage.” Id. at 5–6. | 5 | 15 |
Taylor v. Stategreen2 sentences2016The type of closing argument defense chooses to make is an inherently tactical decision “based on the way a trial is unfolding, the trial strategy employed, the experience and judgment of the defense attorney, and other factors.” Taylor v. State, 947 S.W.2d 698, 704 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1997, pet. ref’d). “[C]ounsel has wide latitude in deciding how best to represent a client, and deference to counsel’s tactical decisions in his closing presentation is particularly important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategy at that stage.” Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1 , 5–6 (2003) 2015The type of closing argument to make is an inherently tactical decision "based onthe way a trial is unfolding, the trial 12 strategy employed, the experience and judgment of the defense attorney, and other factors." Taylor v. State, 947 S.W.2d 698, 704 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1997, pet. refd). "[C]ounsel has wide latitude in deciding how best to represent a client, and deference to counsel's tactical decisions in his closing presentation is particularly important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategy at that stage." Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1, 5-6 (2003) (per curiam). | 4 | 4 |
Bone v. Stategreen1 sentence2018Without more, we must defer 120 (...continued) representation. 121 Garza, 213 S.W.3d at 348 . 122 Bone v. State, 77 S.W.3d 828, 833 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Sperling v. Stategreen1 sentence2014See Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1 , 5–6, 124 S. Ct. 1, 4 (2003) (holding that deference to counsel’s tactical decisions in his closing presentation is important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategies at that stage); Cueva v. State, 339 S.W.3d 839 , 864–65 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2011, pet. ref’d) (holding that defense counsel’s use of the word “victim” when referring to the complainant was not an admission that the defendant had committed the crime); Sperling v. State, 924 S.W.2d 722, 726 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1996, pet. ref’d) (holding that allowing a child witness to | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Garza v. State
green
1 sentence2018Without more, we must defer 120 (...continued) representation. 121 Garza, 213 S.W.3d at 348 . 122 Bone v. State, 77 S.W.3d 828, 833 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Cueva v. State
green
1 sentence2014See Yarborough v. Gentry, 540 U.S. 1 , 5–6, 124 S. Ct. 1, 4 (2003) (holding that deference to counsel’s tactical decisions in his closing presentation is important because of the broad range of legitimate defense strategies at that stage); Cueva v. State, 339 S.W.3d 839 , 864–65 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 2011, pet. ref’d) (holding that defense counsel’s use of the word “victim” when referring to the complainant was not an admission that the defendant had committed the crime); Sperling v. State, 924 S.W.2d 722, 726 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 1996, pet. ref’d) (holding that allowing a child witness to | 1 | 2014–2014 |
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.