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.
10 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 2004–2019 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hernandez v. Stategreen2 sentences2019Hernandez, 116 S.W.3d at 29 . 51 notice of this fact, 53 as the Waco Court noted, judicial notice only satisfies the first two elements of the Kelly test; the State must still establish that “the technique [was] properly applied on the occasion in question.” Vela, 209 S.W.3d at 133-34 (quoting Kelly, 824 S.W.2d at 573 ); Holmes, 135 S.W.3d at 195 (“[W]e take judicial notice of the validity of blood spatter analysis and hold that the State was not required . . . to produce evidence on the first two criteria of Kelly.”). 2017Hernandez v. State, 116 S.W.3d 26 , 28-29 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (footnotes omitted). | 3 | 10 |
Holmes v. Stategreen1 sentence2019Hernandez, 116 S.W.3d at 29 . 51 notice of this fact, 53 as the Waco Court noted, judicial notice only satisfies the first two elements of the Kelly test; the State must still establish that “the technique [was] properly applied on the occasion in question.” Vela, 209 S.W.3d at 133-34 (quoting Kelly, 824 S.W.2d at 573 ); Holmes, 135 S.W.3d at 195 (“[W]e take judicial notice of the validity of blood spatter analysis and hold that the State was not required . . . to produce evidence on the first two criteria of Kelly.”). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Kelly v. State
green
1 sentence2019Hernandez, 116 S.W.3d at 29 . 51 notice of this fact, 53 as the Waco Court noted, judicial notice only satisfies the first two elements of the Kelly test; the State must still establish that “the technique [was] properly applied on the occasion in question.” Vela, 209 S.W.3d at 133-34 (quoting Kelly, 824 S.W.2d at 573 ); Holmes, 135 S.W.3d at 195 (“[W]e take judicial notice of the validity of blood spatter analysis and hold that the State was not required . . . to produce evidence on the first two criteria of Kelly.”). | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Vela v. State
green
1 sentence2019Hernandez, 116 S.W.3d at 29 . 51 notice of this fact, 53 as the Waco Court noted, judicial notice only satisfies the first two elements of the Kelly test; the State must still establish that “the technique [was] properly applied on the occasion in question.” Vela, 209 S.W.3d at 133-34 (quoting Kelly, 824 S.W.2d at 573 ); Holmes, 135 S.W.3d at 195 (“[W]e take judicial notice of the validity of blood spatter analysis and hold that the State was not required . . . to produce evidence on the first two criteria of Kelly.”). | 1 | 2019–2019 |