Legal Opinion

Smith v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)

Decided February 1, 2007No. 07-06-0048-CRPublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BRIAN QUINN, Chief Justice.

Appellant, David I. Smith, appeals his conviction for possessing, -with intent to deliver, a controlled substance (cocaine) in a drug free zone. His two issues involve the legal sufficiency of the evidence to sustain his conviction and the trial court’s admission of an extraneous offense. We affirm the judgment.

Issue 1 — Legal Sufficiency

In his first issue, appellant complains of the legal sufficiency of the evidence by contending that the testimony of the only witness to the drug sale was not sufficiently corroborated. Furthermore, corroboration was required…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2002
  2. Lane v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
  3. Ransom v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  4. Dennis v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2004
  5. Thomas v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2003

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. Bailey R. Whitfield, Jr. v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2008
  2. Bailey R. Whitfield, Jr. v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2008
  3. Bailey R. Whitfield, Jr. v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2008
  4. Edwin Ledell Smith v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2007
  5. Edwin Ledell Smith v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2007

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