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.
18 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2025 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 |
|---|---|---|
Almanza v. Statered2 sentences2014See Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157, 171 (Tex. Crim. 2006See Almanza v. State, 686 S.W.2d 157, 171 (Tex.Crim.App.1985). | 4 | 4 |
Howard v. State of Texasgreen2 sentences2015See Freeman v. State, 352 S.W.3d 77, 82 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd); Howard v. State, 972 S.W.2d 121, 126 (Tex.App.–Austin 1998, no pet.). 2013See Freeman v. State, 352 S.W.3d 77, 82 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd); Howard v. State, 972 S.W.2d 121, 126 (Tex.App.-Austin 1998, no pet.). | 3 | 3 |
Freeman v. Stategreen2 sentences2015See Freeman v. State, 352 S.W.3d 77, 82 (Tex.App.–Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd); Howard v. State, 972 S.W.2d 121, 126 (Tex.App.–Austin 1998, no pet.). 2013See Freeman v. State, 352 S.W.3d 77, 82 (Tex.App.-Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, pet. ref'd); Howard v. State, 972 S.W.2d 121, 126 (Tex.App.-Austin 1998, no pet.). | 3 | 3 |
Cocke v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Cocke v. State, 201 S.W.3d 744, 748 (Tex.Crim.App. 2006). 2014Cocke v. State, 201 S.W.3d 744, 748 (Tex. Crim. | 3 | 3 |
Davis v. Stategreen1 sentence2025See Davis v. State, 278 S.W.3d 346, 352 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009) (holding performance deficient in jury trial in which trial counsel failed to request an accomplice witness jury instruction). | 1 | 1 |
HART, ROBERT EARL v. the State of Texasgreen1 sentence2024Hart, 667 S.W.3d at 782. “[I]t is difficult to envision that any competent attorney would reasonably forego an accomplice-witness jury instruction as a matter of strategy based on his theory of the case.” Zamora, 411 S.W.3d at 514 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Belchergreen1 sentence2017State v. Belcher, 183 S.W.3d 443, 449-50 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet,) (holding that a new trial was justified where trial counsel admitted error in failing to exercise peremptory challenges); State v. Trevino, 930 S.W.2d 713, 715-16 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, pet. ref’d.) (holding that a new trial was warranted “in the interest of justice” based upon a lack of an accomplice witness jury instruction); State v. Dixon, 893 S.W.2d 286, 288 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1995, no pet.) (upholding a trial court’s order granting a new trial based upon Batson error and ineffective assista | 1 | 1 |
State v. Trevinogreen1 sentence2017State v. Belcher, 183 S.W.3d 443, 449-50 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet,) (holding that a new trial was justified where trial counsel admitted error in failing to exercise peremptory challenges); State v. Trevino, 930 S.W.2d 713, 715-16 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, pet. ref’d.) (holding that a new trial was warranted “in the interest of justice” based upon a lack of an accomplice witness jury instruction); State v. Dixon, 893 S.W.2d 286, 288 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1995, no pet.) (upholding a trial court’s order granting a new trial based upon Batson error and ineffective assista | 1 | 1 |
State v. Dixongreen1 sentence2017State v. Belcher, 183 S.W.3d 443, 449-50 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2005, no pet,) (holding that a new trial was justified where trial counsel admitted error in failing to exercise peremptory challenges); State v. Trevino, 930 S.W.2d 713, 715-16 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1996, pet. ref’d.) (holding that a new trial was warranted “in the interest of justice” based upon a lack of an accomplice witness jury instruction); State v. Dixon, 893 S.W.2d 286, 288 (Tex. App.—Texarkana 1995, no pet.) (upholding a trial court’s order granting a new trial based upon Batson error and ineffective assista | 1 | 1 |
Goodspeed v. Stategreen1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Fox v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Druery v. Stategreen1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen2 sentences2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Thompson v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Mata v. Stategreen1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Tong v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 1 |
Robinson v. Stategreen2 sentences2001In Robinson v. State, the court found that counsel's failure to request an accomplice witness jury instruction was a "glaring error." Robinson, 665 S.W.2d 826, 831-32 (Tex.App.-Austin 1984, pet. ref'd). 2001In Robinson v. State, the court found that counsel’s failure to request an accomplice witness jury instruction was a “glaring error.” Robinson, 665 S.W.2d 826, 831-32 (Tex.App.— Austin 1984, pet. ref'd). | 1 | 1 |
McFarland v. Statered1 sentence2001The State cites McFarland v. State , 928 S.W.2d 482, 514 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996), and Blake v. State , 971 S.W.2d 451, 454-55 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998), to support its position that neither Mitchell’s presence, knowledge of the firearm, guilty plea in connection with the cocaine nor other evidence warranted an accomplice witness jury instruction or a finding that Mitchell was an accomplice to appellant’s possession of the firearm as a convicted felon. | 1 | 1 |
Blake v. Stategreen1 sentence2001The State cites McFarland v. State , 928 S.W.2d 482, 514 (Tex.Crim.App. 1996), and Blake v. State , 971 S.W.2d 451, 454-55 (Tex.Crim.App. 1998), to support its position that neither Mitchell’s presence, knowledge of the firearm, guilty plea in connection with the cocaine nor other evidence warranted an accomplice witness jury instruction or a finding that Mitchell was an accomplice to appellant’s possession of the firearm as a convicted felon. | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Zepedagreen1 sentence1998Ex parte Zepeda, 819 S.W.2d 874, 877 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ngo v. State
green
1 sentence2025Ngo v. State, 175 S.W.3d 738 , 743-44 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Zamora, Jaime Arturo
green
1 sentence2024Hart, 667 S.W.3d at 782. “[I]t is difficult to envision that any competent attorney would reasonably forego an accomplice-witness jury instruction as a matter of strategy based on his theory of the case.” Zamora, 411 S.W.3d at 514 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Ex Parte Martinez
green
1 sentence2003Ann. art 38.14 (Vernon 2005); Druery v. State , 225 S.W.3d 491, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007). Â By their own testimony, Massey and Bell admit to being accomplices with Scott; Massey also claims that Streng participated in the entire episode as an accomplice in an effort to perpetrate insurance fraud. Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Ineffective assistance of counsel claims are evaluated under the two-part test formulated by the United States Supreme Court in Strickland v. Washington , requiring a showing of both deficient performance and prejudice. Â 466 U.S. 668, 689 (1984); Thompson v. State , 9 S.W.3d 8 | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.