Guerra motion in Texas

2023Anderson v. Bessman, 365 S.W.3d 119, 124 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.).

2023Casting a slightly larger shadow of doubt on her credibility would not “put the whole case in such a different light as to undermine confidence in the verdict.” See Kyles, 514 U.S. at 435 ; see also Webb v. State, 232 S.W.3d 109, 115 (Tex. Crim.

2014In determining whether the trial court erred in denying Guerra’s motion for mistrial on the basis of an allegedly improper argument by the State, we look to “most, if not all, of the same considerations that attend a harm analysis.” See Archie, 221 S.W.3d at 699 (quoting Hawkins, 135 S.W.3d at 77 ).

2014See id.

2012See Valtierra, 310 S.W.3d at 447 .

2012See id.

2011Here, the record contains the reporter’s record from the hearing on appellant’s motion for rehearing 3; however, appellant has not ensured that the appellate record contains a reporter’s record of the hearing conducted on Guerra’s motion for attorney’s fees. 4 See Mercedes Benz Credit Corp., 925 S.W.2d at 666 ; Appleton, 76 S.W.3d at 87 .

2011See Mercedes Benz Credit Corp. v. Rhyne, 925 S.W.2d 664, 666 (Tex. 1996). 4 We note that at the hearing on Regalado’s motion for rehearing, Guerra’s attorney stated: And on the record on June 1st and then again on August 26th, [Regalado’s attorney] stipulated to the reasonable and necessariness of [Guerra’s appellate attorney’s fees] that were incurred.

2011Without the reporter’s record on Guerra’s hearing for attorney’s fees, we cannot determine whether the trial court abused its discretion by awarding attorney’s fees to Guerra.5 See Appleton, 76 S.W.3d at 87 ; see also Wilms v. Americas Tire Co., Inc., 190 S.W.3d 796, 803 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (explaining that the appellate court must 3 In his brief, Regalado cites only to portions of the hearing on his motion for rehearing and portions of the hearing held in 2007 on Guerra’s motion for turnover relief.

2011Without the reporter’s record on Guerra’s hearing for attorney’s fees, we cannot determine whether the trial court abused its discretion by awarding attorney’s fees to Guerra.5 See Appleton, 76 S.W.3d at 87 ; see also Wilms v. Americas Tire Co., Inc., 190 S.W.3d 796, 803 (Tex. App.–Dallas 2006, pet. denied) (explaining that the appellate court must 3 In his brief, Regalado cites only to portions of the hearing on his motion for rehearing and portions of the hearing held in 2007 on Guerra’s motion for turnover relief.

1997See Fambrough v. Wagley, 140 Tex. 577 , 169 S.W.2d 478, 482 (1943).

1997See Fambrough v. Wagley, 140 Tex. 577 , 169 S.W.2d 478, 482 (1943).

1993See Perez v. State 432 S.W.2d 954, 955 (Tex.Crim.App.1968).

1992Therefore, the Benavides Independent School District already had an opportunity to make findings as to Guerra’s challenge to B.I.S.D.’s contract which assigned him to a different position) (emphasis added); Cook v. Neill, 163 Tex. 49, 59 , 352 S.W.2d 258, 264 (1961) (appeal of the enforceability of order to annex two school districts to Big Spring Independent School District could be decided by court because allowed by Article 2686) (emphasis added).

1992Therefore, the Benavides Independent School District already had an opportunity to make findings as to Guerra’s challenge to B.I.S.D.’s contract which assigned him to a different position) (emphasis added); Cook v. Neill, 163 Tex. 49, 59 , 352 S.W.2d 258, 264 (1961) (appeal of the enforceability of order to annex two school districts to Big Spring Independent School District could be decided by court because allowed by Article 2686) (emphasis added).