evidence insufficient standard (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

evidence insufficient standard in Texas

85 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 2010–2020 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 (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Tibbs v. Floridagreen
scotus · 1982 · cited in 66 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2020
2 sentences

2013“If a reviewing court finds the evidence insufficient under this standard, it must reverse the judgm ent and enter an order ofacquittal.” Id. (citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982)). “‘[S]ufficienc yofthe evidence should be measured by the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge for the case.” Id. (quoting Malik v. State, 953 S.W.3d 234 ,240 (rex.

2013“If a reviewing court finds the evidence insufficient under this standard, it must reverse the judgm ent and enter an order ofacquittal.” Id. (citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982)). “‘[S]ufficienc yofthe evidence should be measured by the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge for the case.” Id. (quoting Malik v. State, 953 S.W.3d 234 ,240 (rex.

6166
Garcia, Aima Lorenagreen
texcrimapp · 2012 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2018–2018
2 sentences

2018See Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 (1982); Garcia v. State, 367 S.W.3d 683, 687 (Tex. Crim.

2018See Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 (1982); Garcia v. State, 367 S.W.3d 683, 687 (Tex. Crim.

22
Clayton v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2007 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2015
2 sentences

2015Id. (citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 , 102 S.Ct. 2211, 2218 , 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982)).An appellate court "determine^] whether the necessary inferences are reasonable based upon the combined and cumulative force of all the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict." Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772, 778 (Tex. Crim.

2012Gonzalez, 337 S.W.3d at 479 . 5 An appellate court “determine[s] whether the necessary inferences are reasonable based upon the combined and cumulative force of all the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict.” Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772, 778 (Tex. Crim.

22
Malik v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1997 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2012–2012
2 sentences

2012Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 , 102 S.Ct. 2211 , 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982). “[Sufficiency of the evidence should be measured by the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge for the case.” Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234, 240 (Tex.Crim.App.1997).

2012Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 (1982). “[S]ufficiency of the evidence should be measured by the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge for the case.” Malik v. State, 953 S.W.2d 234, 240 (Tex. Crim.

22
Woodard v. Stategreen
texapp · 2010 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011Woodard v. State, 335 S.W.3d 337, 340 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, no pet. h.).

2011Woodard v. State, 335 S.W.3d 337, 340 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, no pet. h.).

22
Burks v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1978 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015Finally, whenever an appellate court finds the evidence insufficient under this standard, it must reverse the judgment and enter an order of acquittal.15 The Supreme Court in Burks v. United States held that because the "Double Jeopardy Clause precludes a second trial once the reviewing court has found the evidence legally insufficient, the only 'just' remedy available for a court finding legal insufficiency is a judgment of acquittal." Burks v. United States, 437 U.S. 1, 18 (1978).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

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

Also cited on this issue (3)

CaseCitedYears
Gonzalez v. State green
texapp · 2011
2 sentences

2016Gonzalez, 337 S.W.3d at 479 .

2015Id. (citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 , 102 S.Ct. 2211, 2218 , 72 L.Ed.2d 652 (1982)).An appellate court "determine^] whether the necessary inferences are reasonable based upon the combined and cumulative force of all the evidence viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict." Clayton v. State, 235 S.W.3d 772, 778 (Tex. Crim.

222011–2016
Jackson v. Virginia red
scotus · 1979
2 sentences

2014See Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 , 102 S. Ct. 2211, 2218 (1982); Jackson, 443 U.S. at 317–19, 99 S. Ct. at 2788–89.

2014See Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31, 41 , 102 S. Ct. 2211, 2218 (1982); Jackson, 443 U.S. at 317–19, 99 S. Ct. at 2788–89.

22014–2014
Laster v. State green
texcrimapp · 2009
1 sentence

2013“If a reviewing court finds the evidence insufficient under this standard, it must reverse the judgm ent and enter an order ofacquittal.” Id. (citing Tibbs v. Florida, 457 U.S. 31 (1982)). “‘[S]ufficienc yofthe evidence should be measured by the elements of the offense as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge for the case.” Id. (quoting Malik v. State, 953 S.W.3d 234 ,240 (rex.

12013–2013

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TX § Tex. Penal Code § 1.07 (10) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 22.021 (6) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 19.02 (5) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 21.02 (5) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 21.11 (5) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 31.03 (5) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 22.02 (4) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 22.01 (3) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 30.02 (3) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 7.01 (3) TX § Tex. Penal Code § 9.31 (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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check