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 1986–2018 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Wilkerson v. Stategreen2 sentences2018See Rodriguez v. State, 74 S.W.3d 563, 566 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2002, pet. ref’d) (citing Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex. Crim. 2002See Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex.Crim.App.1986), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 924 , 110 S.Ct. 292 , 107 L.Ed.2d 272 (1989)(holding that absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available and that their testimony would benefit the defense, “counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment”). | 5 | 5 |
Wade v. Stategreen2 sentences2009App. 1986) ("Absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available, and that their testimony would benefit the defense, counsel's failure to call witnesses is of no moment."); Wade v. State, 164 S.W.3d 788, 796 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.). 2008App. 1986) ("Absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available, and that their testimony would benefit the defense, counsel's failure to call witnesses is of no moment."); Wade v. State , 164 S.W.3d 788, 796 (Tex. App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet.). | 4 | 4 |
Rodriguez v. Stategreen2 sentences2018See Rodriguez v. State, 74 S.W.3d 563, 566 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2002, pet. ref’d) (citing Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex. Crim. 2016See 11 Rodriquez v. State, 74 S.W.3d 563, 566 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2002, pet. ref’d) (citing Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Parmer v. Stategreen2 sentences2010App. 1986) ("Absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available, and that their testimony would benefit the defense, counsel's failure to call witnesses is of no moment."); Parmer v. State , 38 S.W.3d 661, 668 (Tex. App.--Austin 2000, pet. ref'd) ("Counsel's failure to call witnesses at the guilt/innocence stage of a trial is irrelevant to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel absent a showing that the witnesses were available and the defendant would have benefitted from the presentation of their testimony."). 2010App. 1986) (“Absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available, and that their testimony would benefit the defense, counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment.”); Parmer v. State, 38 S.W.3d 661, 668 (Tex. App.—Austin 2000, pet. ref’d) (“Counsel’s failure to 17 call witnesses at the guilt/innocence stage of a trial is irrelevant to a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel absent a showing that the witnesses were available and the defendant would have benefitted from the presentation of their testimony.”). | 2 | 2 |
Bormann v. AT&T Communications, Inc.green2 sentences2009App. 1986), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 924 , 107 L.Ed.2d 272 , 110 S.Ct. 292 (1989)(holding that absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available and that their testimony would benefit the defense, “counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment”). 2002See Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex.Crim.App.1986), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 924 , 110 S.Ct. 292 , 107 L.Ed.2d 272 (1989)(holding that absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available and that their testimony would benefit the defense, “counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment”). | 1 | 5 |
Wilkerson v. Texasgreen2 sentences2009App. 1986), cert. denied , 493 U.S. 924 , 107 L.Ed.2d 272 , 110 S.Ct. 292 (1989)(holding that absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available and that their testimony would benefit the defense, “counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment”). 2002See Wilkerson v. State, 726 S.W.2d 542, 550-51 (Tex.Crim.App.1986), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 924 , 110 S.Ct. 292 , 107 L.Ed.2d 272 (1989)(holding that absent a showing that potential defense witnesses were available and that their testimony would benefit the defense, “counsel’s failure to call witnesses is of no moment”). | 1 | 5 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
King v. State
green
2 sentences1986Butler, supra, at 55, citing King v. State, 649 S.W.2d 42 (Tex. Cr.App.1983). 1986Butler, supra, at 55, citing King v. State, 649 S.W.2d 42 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). | 1 | 1986–1986 |