Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Court Cases

Search
  1. High v. State (1978)

    On May 26, 1976, we abated the appeal and ordered the trial court to conduct a hearing on the question of appellant's indigency vel non. Subsequent to that decision, the trial court found appellant indigent, ordered a free transcription of the court reporter's notes, and appointed counsel to represent appellant on appeal. The cause is again before us on a supplemental transcript, which contains a transcription of the court reporter's notes and a "frivolous appeal" brief filed by court-appointed [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 52466
  2. Stafford v. State (1991)

    Appellant, Edmond Albert Stafford, was convicted of delivery of more than 28 grams of cocaine for which punishment was assessed at 75 years' confinement. He appealed. The First Court of Appeals in Houston reversed the conviction finding that trial and appellate counsels' deficiencies denied appellant effective assistance of counsel. Stafford v. State, 758 S.W.2d 663 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1988). We granted the State's petition for discretionary review to examine the Court of Appeals' [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1085-88
  3. Ex Parte Young (1967)

    Petition presented originally to this Court is one of the means by which the constitutional authority of the Court of Criminal Appeals to "issue the writ of habeas corpus" may be invoked and the power vested in said Court "upon affidavit or otherwise to ascertain such matters of fact as may be necessary to the exercise of its jurisdiction" applied. (Art. V, Sec. 5, Constitution of Texas, Vernon's Ann.St.)


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 40775
  4. Johnson v. State (2000)

    After a jury trial in Gonzales County, appellant, Jimmie Lee Johnson, was convicted of two counts of aggravated sexual assault. Johnson v. State, 978 S.W.2d 703 (Tex.App.-Corpus Christi 1998). The jury recommended that appellant pay a $10,000 fine and serve a term of life imprisonment, and judgment was rendered accordingly. On direct appeal to the Thirteenth Court of Appeals, appellant challenged the factual sufficiency of the evidence after asserting that the State failed to prove an essential [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1915-98
  5. Clewis v. State (1996)

    Appellant was convicted of burglary of a building, and the Fifth Court of Appeals affirmed his conviction. Clewis v. State, 876 S.W.2d 428 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1994). In his sole ground for review, appellant contends that the court of appeals erred in refusing to review the evidence to determine whether it was factually sufficient to sustain his conviction. See Stone v. State, 823 S.W.2d 375 (Tex.App.-Austin 1992, pet. ref'd, untimely filed). Specifically, appellant avers that the evidence was [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 0450-94
  6. Guzman v. State (1997)

    Appellant was convicted of the offense of possession of heroin and punishment was assessed at twenty years' imprisonment. Texas Controlled Substances Act, Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. Section 481.115 (Vernon 1992). The Austin Court of Appeals reversed appellant's conviction and remanded the cause to the trial court. Guzman v. State, 867 S.W.2d 126 (Tex.App.—Austin 1993). In its petition for discretionary review, the State presented the following question:


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 190-94
  7. Thompson v. State (1999)

    Appellant, Marcus Bernard Thompson, was charged by indictment with the murder of Michael Wagner. A jury determined appellant was guilty, and he was sentenced to twenty years imprisonment.[1] An appeal was filed with the Fourteenth Court of Appeals claiming, among other alleged errors, that trial counsel provided ineffective assistance and thus violated appellant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel. Specifically, appellant argued his trial counsel was ineffective for the single error of failing [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1532-98
  8. Watson v. State (2006)

    We granted the State's petition for discretionary review in this cause to address the question whether the court of appeals can reverse a conviction on the basis of factual insufficiency of the evidence even when it believes that the evidence preponderates in favor of guilt, consistent with our opinion in Zuniga v. State.[1] Moreover, we granted discretionary review on our own motion to address the further question whether we should undertake further clarification of the Clewis[2] standard for [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: PD-469-05
  9. Bledsoe v. State (2005)

    Appellant was charged with and convicted of the offense of escape.[1] A jury sentenced him to fifteen years' imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-institutional division, and assessed a $5,000.00 fine. Appellant's counsel filed an Anders[2] brief with the court of appeals and moved to withdraw from the case. Appellant also filed a brief with the court of appeals in response to the Anders brief. In a memorandum opinion, the court of appeals stated that no reversible error [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: PD-300-04
  10. Cain v. State (1997)

    Appellant was charged with violating the civil rights of a prisoner.[1] § 39.021(a)(1) Texas Penal Code (Vernon 1993). The jury found Appellant guilty and assessed punishment at ten years' imprisonment, probated for five years, and a fine of five hundred dollars. As a condition of probation, Appellant was ordered to serve 30 days in the county jail.


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1525-96
  11. Gainous v. State (1969)

    Such counsel, Honorable Joe E. Turner, after an examination of the record found the appeal to be frivolous and without merit. Aware of his duties as prescribed by Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493,[2] counsel, in light of Texas appellate procedure, has utilized as near perfect procedure as this writer has observed.


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 41743
  12. Malik v. State (1997)

    A jury found appellant guilty of unlawfully carrying a weapon, namely, a handgun. The trial court assessed punishment at 90 days confinement in the Harris County Jail, probated for one year, and a $300 fine. The Fourteenth Court of Appeals reversed appellant's conviction with an order to the trial court to enter a judgment of acquittal. Malik v. State, No. C14-92-01293-CR, 1994 WL 622002, (Tex.App.—Houston [14th Dist], delivered November 10, 1994)(unpublished). The Court of Appeals reasoned [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 472-96
  13. Hooper v. State (2007)

    Appellant Reginald Hooper was convicted by a jury of aggravated assault of a public servant and sentenced to 30 years' confinement in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice-Correctional Institution Division. The State presented evidence at the guilt phase of the trial that during March 2004 Appellant was the getaway driver from an aggravated robbery and that a passenger in Appellant's vehicle, one of the robbers, shot at a Parks and Wildlife game warden while trying to flee.


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: PD-1352-05
  14. State v. Ross (2000)

    Appellee filed a motion to suppress evidence that alleged no probable cause for his arrest. At the hearing on the motion, the only witness to testify was the arresting Texas Alcoholic Beverage Commission (TABC) agent. Following the testimony, the judge granted the motion and did not file findings of fact. On appeal, the Court of Appeals found that the agent's testimony, if believed, showed reasonable suspicion for the initial detention and probable cause for the eventual arrest.[1] However, the [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1618-99
  15. Brooks v. State (2010)

    We granted discretionary review in this case to address, among other things, whether there is any meaningful distinction between a legal-sufficiency standard under Jackson v. Virginia[1] and a factual-sufficiency standard under Clewis v. State and whether there is a need to retain both standards.[2] Under the Jackson v. Virginia legal-sufficiency standard, a reviewing court is required to defer to a jury's credibility and weight determinations.[3] In Clewis, this Court adopted a [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: PD-0210-09
  16. Currie v. State (1974)

    Court-appointed counsel on appeal, who also represented appellant at the trial, has filed an appellate brief in which he concludes that the appeal is without merit and wholly frivolous. The brief has been served upon appellant. No pro se brief has been filed. The brief of counsel does not advance any arguable grounds of error, but does contain a professional evaluation of the record demonstrating why, in effect, there are no arguable grounds to be advanced. His brief is not the "conclusory [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 49455
  17. Olivo v. State (1996)

    Appellant was convicted of murder, and the jury assessed punishment at forty years of confinement. Appellant's notice of appeal was due to be filed on June 27, 1994. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on July 12, 1994, the fifteenth day after it was due. Appellant's motion for extension of time, styled a "Motion for Leave to File Late Notice of Appeal," was filed on September 27, 1994. The Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Olivo v. State, 894 S.W.2d 58 [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 0442-95
  18. Carmouche v. State (2000)

    Appellant was convicted by a jury of the offense of possession of a controlled substance, sentenced to twenty years confinement and assessed a $10,000 fine. See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. § 481.115 (Vernon 1992 & Supp 1999). The Ninth Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's conviction. Carmouche v. State, 989 S.W.2d 392 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1999). We granted appellant's pro se petition to review whether the appellate court erred in affirming the trial court's decision to admit evidence [...]

    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 0614-99
  19. Mosley v. State (1998)

    Appellant was convicted in October 1995 of capital murder. Tex. Penal Code § 19.03(a)(2).[1] Pursuant to the jury's answers to the special issues set forth in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 37.071 §§ 2(b) and 2(e), the trial judge sentenced appellant to death. Article 37.071 § 2(g).[2] Direct appeal to this Court is automatic. Article 37.071 § 2(h). Appellant raises points of error numbered through 176.[3] We will affirm.


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 72281
  20. Sims v. State (2003)

    Today we are called upon to decide whether and to what extent a reviewing court must discuss particular evidence admitted at trial when an appellant claims that the evidence was factually insufficient to support his conviction. We conclude that, as a general proposition, reviewing courts should at least mention what the parties assert is the most important or most relevant evidence supporting a claim that the evidence is factually insufficient.


    Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas Docket: 1328-01

1 of 2575 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5