Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Byrd v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)

Decided July 26, 2006No. 14-04-00883-CRPublished

1ConcurrenceKem Thompson Frost, Justice

In his second issue, appellant asserts that the trial court’s jury charge regarding parole violated his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. Appellant argues that the wording of the charge is ambiguous and caused the jury to improperly consider parole eligibility in assessing his sentence. I write separately to address both the proper analysis of this issue and appellant’s argument that it is improper and unconstitutional for the jury to consider parole eligibility in determining punishment. Some background is helpful to understand the context…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Estelle v. McGuireSupreme Court of the United States · 1991
  2. Almanza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
  3. Caldwell v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  4. Victor v. NebraskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  5. Hutch v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996

19 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