Legal Opinion · Dissent

Black v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided October 13, 1987No. 05-83-00366-CRPublished

1DissentMcCRAW, Justice

I dissent for two reasons. First, the majority has exceeded the scope of the Court of Criminal Appeals’ mandate in deciding this case on remand. Second, the state of the evidence does not support the majority’s conclusion that the charging error is harmless. I would reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand for new trial.

The Mandate

The Court of Criminal Appeals, in twenty-six words, succinctly and specifically restricted the scope of review on remand: “The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals is vacated and remanded to the Court of Appeals for consideration in light of Govan v.…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Almanza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
  2. McGoldrick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
  3. Brown v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  4. Black v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  5. Payne v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972

2 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