absence of a limiting instruction (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

absence of a limiting instruction in Texas

7 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1993–2009 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
Garcia v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1994 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2009–2009
2 sentences

2009See Garcia v. State , 887 S.W.2d 862, 878 (Tex. Crim.

2009See Garcia v. State, 887 S.W.2d 862, 878 (Tex. Crim.

22
Jones v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1996 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2008–2008
1 sentence

2008Additionally, the trial court’s charge instructed the jury that a witness’s prior inconsistent statement could only be considered for impeachment purposes to asses the witness’s credibility.7 This “reduced the risk the jury might misuse the evidence during jury deliberations.” Jones v. State, 944 S.W.2d 642, 654 (Tex. Crim.

11
Abdnor v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1994 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2007–2007
1 sentence

2007Thus, her credibility was critical to her defense and was undermined by the extraneous-misconduct evidence that Nilda's counsel introduced to portray her as a generally bad person. (33) In the absence of a limiting instruction under such circumstances, we conclude that "'any prejudice resulting from introduction of the extraneous offense is unabated. '" Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Abdnor v. State , 871 S.W.2d 726, 738 (Tex. Crim.

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 (5)

CaseCitedYears
Ex Parte Varelas green
texcrimapp · 2001
1 sentence

2007Thus, her credibility was critical to her defense and was undermined by the extraneous-misconduct evidence that Nilda's counsel introduced to portray her as a generally bad person. (33) In the absence of a limiting instruction under such circumstances, we conclude that "'any prejudice resulting from introduction of the extraneous offense is unabated. '" Id. (emphasis added) (quoting Abdnor v. State , 871 S.W.2d 726, 738 (Tex. Crim.

12007–2007
Jim Howe Homes, Inc. v. Rogers green
texapp · 1991
1 sentence

1997Rogers, 818 S.W.2d at 903 . 12 The court must submit broad-form questions in the charge absent extraordinary circumstances.

11997–1997
Almanza v. State green
texcrimapp · 1985
1 sentence

1995Appellant admits that since she failed to lodge an objection at trial to the absence of a limiting instruction on the extraneous offenses issue, this Court's harm analysis is governed by Almanza v. State , 686 S.W.2d 157 (Tex. Crim.

11995–1995
Chessher v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co. green
tex · 1983
1 sentence

1993In a companion case to Varela, Teakell v. Perma Stone Co., 658 S.W.2d 563 (Tex.), reversing 653 S.W.2d 483 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1983), the defendant did argue that plaintiff's employer's negligence was the sole proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries as a matter of law. 653 S.W.2d at 488-489 .

11993–1993
Perma Stone Co. v. Teakell green
texapp · 1983
2 sentences

1993In a companion case to Varela, Teakell v. Perma Stone Co., 658 S.W.2d 563 (Tex.), reversing 653 S.W.2d 483 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1983), the defendant did argue that plaintiff's employer's negligence was the sole proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries as a matter of law. 653 S.W.2d at 488-489 .

1993In a companion case to Varela, Teakell v. Perma Stone Co., 658 S.W.2d 563 (Tex.), reversing 653 S.W.2d 483 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1983), the defendant did argue that plaintiff's employer's negligence was the sole proximate cause of plaintiff's injuries as a matter of law. 653 S.W.2d at 488-489 .

11993–1993

Where else courts name it

CA 14 (2009–2022) NY 12 (1985–2025) WA 11 (2001–2024) MA 8 (1998–2026) TX 7 (1993–2009) CO 7 (1990–2026) MS 7 (1995–2019) IL 6 (1973–2014) NV 3 (2018–2024) FL 3 (1991–2001) NJ 3 (1979–2024) CT 3 (2004–2020) AZ 3 (1987–2015) KS 3 (1988–2009) MI 2 (2016–2019) IN 2 (1997–2013) RI 2 (1994–2016) PA 2 (2016–2018) VT 2 (2003–2008)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check