Legal Opinion

Murdock v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided February 3, 1993No. 1611-92PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

2Per curiam

Appellant was convicted by a jury of illegal investment and sentenced to twenty-five years confinement and a fine of $300,-000.00. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Murdock v. State, 840 S.W.2d 558 (Tex.App.—Texarkana, 1992).

During the punishment phase, the trial court admitted evidence concerning extraneous conduct which did not result in final convictions. In Grunsfeld v. State, 843 S.W.2d 521 (Tex.Cr.App. No. 1037-91, delivered October 28, 1992), we held that unad-judicated extraneous offenses were inadmissible at the punishment phase of…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Grunsfeld v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
  2. Murdock v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992

4Cited by22 opinions

  1. King v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2006
  2. Williams v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1996
  3. Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1996
  4. Huff v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1995
  5. Stone v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)1996

17 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