Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

The Court granted the applicant's writ of habeas corpus, finding ineffective assistance of trial counsel under Strickland and setting aside the 16‑year sentence, remanding for a new punishment hearing; Justice Yeary, dissenting, argued that laches bars relief.

The Court held that the court of appeals properly considered Appellant’s preserved but unassigned indictment-notice claim on remand, because the prior remand did not resolve that distinct claim and the court of appeals retained broad authority to address remaining issues.

The court denied habeas relief on all seven claims arising from Applicant's capital-murder conviction and death sentence. It held Claim 1 procedurally barred, rejected the guilt-phase investigation and other ineffective-assistance claims on the merits, and concluded that any deficiency in the mitigation investigation…

The court affirmed the capital-murder conviction and death sentence, rejecting challenges concerning jury selection, the defendant's absence from pretrial status hearings, excluded testimony, lesser-included-offense instructions, penalty-phase evidence, jury deliberations, a mistrial, mitigation instructions, and a…

The Court held that the Sixth Amendment's Confrontation Clause does not apply to a hearing on a motion to enter adjudication of guilt and revoke deferred-adjudication community supervision.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the conviction of Pablo Alfaro-Jimenez, holding that the State failed to prove that the counterfeit Social Security card was a "governmental record" as required by Texas Penal Code §§37.10(a)(4) and (a)(5).

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, rejecting the appellant's arguments on venue, a new‑trial motion, juror excusal, a Batson challenge, and the admission of aggravated‑robbery evidence.

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas affirmed the trial court’s grant of a motion to suppress evidence, holding that the State’s warrantless testing of Juan Martinez Jr.’s blood drawn for medical purposes violated the Fourth Amendment.

The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in admitting Detective Doyle's accident reconstruction testimony, that the Nenno reliability test was the proper standard, and that Doyle was qualified and his testimony reliable.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the lower court's denial of the appellant's motion to suppress, holding that suppression is not available under the Stored Communications Act or Article 18.21 unless the violation also breaches the Constitution, and that the appellant had no reasonable expectation of…

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that the Fort Worth Court of Appeals erred in its legal sufficiency analysis and reversed the acquittals, finding the evidence sufficient to support Appellant's theft convictions on both counts.

The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment upholding the $10,000 fine assessed by the jury, holding that the trial judge's failure to orally pronounce the fine does not invalidate its imposition.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals and held that the trial judge did not abuse discretion in admitting expert testimony that the defendant was "holding himself out" as a gang member, finding the evidence relevant to sentencing under Article 37.07 and Rule 401.

The Court affirmed the First Court of Appeals, holding that a trial judge who sua sponte instructs the jury on self‑defense creates a duty to apply that instruction to all offenses, including lesser‑included offenses, and that failure to do so is reversible error reviewed under the egregious‑harm standard because the…

The Court of Criminal Appeals held that a video recording may be authenticated through circumstantial evidence without a witness who observed the scene, affirming the trial court's admission of the video.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed Albert Junior Febus's conviction for failing to register as a sex offender, holding that the State need not prove a culpable mental state for the failure‑to‑register element and that a rational jury could find the essential elements beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals and held that Officer Salinas had reasonable suspicion to conduct a Terry frisk of passenger Ernesto Lerma and that the traffic stop was not unreasonably prolonged.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that a defendant must preserve a claim of improper jury argument by objecting and pursuing the objection to an adverse ruling; failure to do so forfeits the error, even when the argument is highly inflammatory.

The Court affirmed the conviction of Michael Wayne Bohannan for violating a civil commitment order, holding that a conviction is valid even though the underlying commitment order was later reversed on appeal because the statutory offense is based on the defendant's status at the time of the violation, not on the…

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying Dan Dale Burch's motion for a new trial and that Burch failed to demonstrate the prejudice required for ineffective assistance of counsel.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals denied Orian Lee Scott's habeas corpus application, holding that his counsel's performance at the punishment phase was not deficient and that his 100‑year sentence did not violate the Eighth Amendment. Accordingly, the court affirmed the lower court's denial of relief.

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Court of Appeals' decision and reinstated Hernandez's conviction for aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. It held that the evidence was legally sufficient to support the conviction and that any variance between the indictment and the proof was immaterial.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals and reinstated the trial court’s conviction, holding that the deputy had reasonable suspicion to prolong the traffic stop based on the totality of circumstances and that the trial court’s implied findings on the officer’s training and experience were…

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the trial court's conviction and sentence, holding that the record’s silence on counsel’s reasons means the presumption of reasonable strategy was not rebutted and therefore counsel did not provide ineffective assistance.

The Court affirmed the lower courts, holding that (1) anti‑defensive issues are not cognizable in a pre‑trial habeas proceeding, (2) the statute’s definition of “minor” is not facially overbroad when “represents” is given its ordinary meaning, and (3) the statute does not violate the Dormant Commerce Clause.

The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the evidence was legally sufficient to support Villa's conviction for engaging in organized criminal activity as a member of the Barrio Azteca street gang.

The Court held that Texas Local Government Code §133.102 is facially unconstitutional to the extent it allocates court‑cost fees to the "abused children’s counseling" and "comprehensive rehabilitation" accounts because those allocations violate the Texas Constitution’s separation‑of‑powers clause.

The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the First Court of Appeals' judgment, holding that the trial court's failure to read additional cross‑examination testimony under Article 36.28 was error but harmless, and that the error was properly preserved for review.

The Court of Criminal Appeals held that the complainant, Regina Raglin, was the owner of the apartment because she possessed a greater right to possession than the appellant, and therefore the appellant entered without effective consent.

The Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Second Court of Appeals and reinstated Gregory Shawn Henley's misdemeanor assault conviction, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding evidence offered to support a defense-of-third-person justification under Penal Code Section 9.33.

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Court of Appeals' decision and affirmed the trial court’s admission of extraneous‑offense evidence, holding that Rule 404(b) notice is not required for rebuttal evidence when the defense opens the door.

The Court denied Roderick Harris's motion for leave to file a writ of prohibition and lifted the stays, holding that he lacked a clear right to relief because the trial judge's order was not a purely ministerial act. Justice Alcala, dissenting, would have allowed the application to be filed.

The Court reversed the Court of Appeals, holding that the trial judge erred by excluding evidence of the victim’s past sexual abuse of his sister, which was admissible under Texas Rule of Evidence 412 and the Sixth Amendment Confrontation Clause.

The Court held that the appellant was not required to raise his as‑applied Sixth Amendment challenge to mandatory court costs in the trial court because his first opportunity was on direct appeal, and that the existing record was sufficient to evaluate the challenge without a bill of exceptions, reversing and…

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the Dallas Court of Appeals' reversal of the trial court's grant of a new trial on the ground that the defendant's Eighth Amendment gross disproportionality claim was not substantiated by the record.

The Court held that the appellant forfeited his Sixth Amendment and due‑process claims because he failed to preserve any objection to the admission of a note at trial; consequently the Court reversed the Court of Appeals and affirmed the trial court’s judgment.

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas reversed the Thirteenth Court of Appeals' affirmation of Jose Guadalupe Rodriguez Elizondo's murder conviction and remanded for a new trial because the trial court improperly gave a provocation instruction without sufficient evidence of all three Smith elements, and that error…

The Court held that a pre‑trial habeas petition may raise an as‑applied separation‑of‑powers claim when the prosecution itself infringes the official’s constitutional power, reversing the appellate court on Count I and sustaining the dismissal of the coercion statute on Count II as facially overbroad; dissenting…

The Court held that the evidence was legally sufficient to establish serious bodily injury, reversing the Court of Appeals and reinstating the trial court's first‑degree aggravated assault conviction.

The Court unanimously affirmed Carl Wayne Buntion's death sentence, finding the evidence sufficient to support the jury's future‑dangerousness finding, rejecting challenges to juror competency, the denial of a change‑of‑venue motion, the denial of a motion to disqualify the district attorney, and the trial court's…