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.
12 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1980–2021 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Boatland of Houston, Inc. v. Baileygreen2 sentences2010See Boatland of Houston, Inc., 609 S.W.2d at 750 ; see also Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d at 752 ; Mo. Pac. 2010See Boatland of Houston, Inc. , 609 S.W.2d at 750 ; see also Alvarado , 897 S.W.2d at 752 ; Mo. Pac. | 2 | 2 |
City of Brownsville v. Alvaradogreen2 sentences2010See Boatland of Houston, Inc., 609 S.W.2d at 750 ; see also Alvarado, 897 S.W.2d at 752 ; Mo. Pac. 2010See Boatland of Houston, Inc. , 609 S.W.2d at 750 ; see also Alvarado , 897 S.W.2d at 752 ; Mo. Pac. | 2 | 2 |
Reyes v. Statered2 sentences2001Reyes v. State, 938 S.W.2d 718, 721 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). 2001Reyes v. State, 938 S.W.2d 718, 721 (Tex. Crim. | 2 | 2 |
Romo v. Stategreen2 sentences1987See Johnson v. State, 629 S.W.2d 731, 736 (Tex.Crim.App.1981) (en banc); Romo *442 v. State, 568 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Crim.App.1977) (opinion on reh’g). 1981See Romo v. State, 568 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Cr.App.1978) (opinion on rehearing). | 1 | 2 |
Railroad Commission v. Gulf Energy Exploration Corp.green1 sentence2021See 482 S.W.3d at 571-72 . | 1 | 1 |
Ring v. Arizonagreen1 sentence2008If the Legislature simply designates that the instruction or issue be submitted, we would construe the failure to submit as error, regardless of who would benefit from the submission.85 To allow the omission of a parole instruction to be completely 82 See, for example, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 597-609 (2002) (viewing death penalty sentencing procedure in which at least one aggravating circumstance must be found to justify the death penalty [as is constitutionally required] as increasing punishment beyond the statutory maximum based upon a finding of fact, thus requiring a jury determinat | 1 | 1 |
Almanza v. Stategreen1 sentence2008If the Legislature simply designates that the instruction or issue be submitted, we would construe the failure to submit as error, regardless of who would benefit from the submission.85 To allow the omission of a parole instruction to be completely 82 See, for example, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 597-609 (2002) (viewing death penalty sentencing procedure in which at least one aggravating circumstance must be found to justify the death penalty [as is constitutionally required] as increasing punishment beyond the statutory maximum based upon a finding of fact, thus requiring a jury determinat | 1 | 1 |
Paulson v. Stategreen1 sentence2004After over a hundred years of not requiring or encouraging any jury instruction defining reasonable doubt, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held in 1991 and 1996, respectively, that: (1) a prescribed A Geesa @ instruction, defining reasonable doubt, was not only permissible but mandatory; [5] and (2) a failure to submit this instruction, whether or not requested, was automatic reversible error, immune from harm analysis. [6] See Paulson v. State , 28 S.W.3d 570, 571 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen1 sentence1987See Johnson v. State, 629 S.W.2d 731, 736 (Tex.Crim.App.1981) (en banc); Romo *442 v. State, 568 S.W.2d 298 (Tex.Crim.App.1977) (opinion on reh’g). | 1 | 1 |
State Highway Department v. Pinnergreen1 sentence1980State Highway Dept. v. Pinner, 531 S.W.2d 851, 855 (Tex.Civ.App.—Beaumont 1975, no writ). *675 In the submission of issues to the jury, all four statutory provisions of Art. 6701d, § 86 were included in the charge. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Posey v. Stategreen1 sentence2008App. 1985)(construing Art. 36.19). 84 966 S.W.2d at 63 . 85 Delgado, 235 S.W.3d at 252 n.34 (In Huizar, this Court distinguished Posey and explained the difference between instructing the jury on “defensive” issues and instructing them on the law that is applicable to all cases)(quoting Huizar v. State, 12 S.W.3d 479 , 484 n.7 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Donald James Burd v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. at 74 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Delgado v. State
green
1 sentence2008App. 1985)(construing Art. 36.19). 84 966 S.W.2d at 63 . 85 Delgado, 235 S.W.3d at 252 n.34 (In Huizar, this Court distinguished Posey and explained the difference between instructing the jury on “defensive” issues and instructing them on the law that is applicable to all cases)(quoting Huizar v. State, 12 S.W.3d 479 , 484 n.7 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Huizar v. State
green
1 sentence2008App. 1985)(construing Art. 36.19). 84 966 S.W.2d at 63 . 85 Delgado, 235 S.W.3d at 252 n.34 (In Huizar, this Court distinguished Posey and explained the difference between instructing the jury on “defensive” issues and instructing them on the law that is applicable to all cases)(quoting Huizar v. State, 12 S.W.3d 479 , 484 n.7 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Apprendi v. New Jersey
green
1 sentence2008If the Legislature simply designates that the instruction or issue be submitted, we would construe the failure to submit as error, regardless of who would benefit from the submission.85 To allow the omission of a parole instruction to be completely 82 See, for example, Ring v. Arizona, 536 U.S. 584, 597-609 (2002) (viewing death penalty sentencing procedure in which at least one aggravating circumstance must be found to justify the death penalty [as is constitutionally required] as increasing punishment beyond the statutory maximum based upon a finding of fact, thus requiring a jury determinat | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Hickman v. Durham
neutral
1 sentence1982Tex.R.Civ.P. 279; Samford v. Duff, 483 S.W.2d 517 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1972, writ ref. n.r.e.); Avant v. Gulf Coast Investment Corporation, 457 S.W.2d 134 (Tex.Civ.App.—Dallas 1970, no writ); Hickman v. Durham, 213 S.W.2d 569 (Tex.Civ.App.—Eastland 1948, writ ref. n. r. e.). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Samford v. Duff
green
1 sentence1982Tex.R.Civ.P. 279; Samford v. Duff, 483 S.W.2d 517 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1972, writ ref. n.r.e.); Avant v. Gulf Coast Investment Corporation, 457 S.W.2d 134 (Tex.Civ.App.—Dallas 1970, no writ); Hickman v. Durham, 213 S.W.2d 569 (Tex.Civ.App.—Eastland 1948, writ ref. n. r. e.). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Avant v. Gulf Coast Investment Corporation
green
1 sentence1982Tex.R.Civ.P. 279; Samford v. Duff, 483 S.W.2d 517 (Tex.Civ.App.—Corpus Christi 1972, writ ref. n.r.e.); Avant v. Gulf Coast Investment Corporation, 457 S.W.2d 134 (Tex.Civ.App.—Dallas 1970, no writ); Hickman v. Durham, 213 S.W.2d 569 (Tex.Civ.App.—Eastland 1948, writ ref. n. r. e.). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Southern Pacific Company v. Castro
green
1 sentence1980Even though the appellants may have been entitled to an instruction informing the jury about the statutory uniform standard of care (Castro, supra, at 498 ), no reversible error was committed by the failure to submit such instruction. | 1 | 1980–1980 |
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.