Legal Opinion

Giddings v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided March 26, 1969No. 41987PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is rape; the punishment, life.

We are met at the outset with the question of whether the lineup identification of appellant by the prosecutrix tainted her in-court identification of him as the guilty party under the rules set forth by the Supreme Court of the United States in Stovall v. Denno, 388 U.S. 293, 87 S.Ct. 1967, 18 L.Ed.2d 1199, and by this Court in Graham v. State, 422 S.W.2d 922.

Before making her in-court identification of appellant, the prosecutrix testified that she had ample opportunity to observe her attacker under good lighting conditions…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Stovall v. DennoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Malcus T. Clemons v. United States of America, David E. Clark v. United States of America, Alvin C. Hines v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1968
  3. Arthur Mares v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1967
  4. Graham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1968
  5. United States v. PisanoCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1951

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Garcia v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
  2. Turner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1969
  3. Davenport v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1970
  4. Randolph v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
  5. Sanchez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API