Haynes v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JACKSON, Commissioner.
The conviction was for rape by force and threats; the punishment, life, enhanced under Art. 62 Vernon’s Ann.P.C.
The sufficiency of the evidence is not challenged.
The first ground of error urged by appellant is that the court erred in not permitting the witness Edenberg to testify that the house of Larry McCoy, the place of the alleged rape, was used for prostitution.
This testimony was offered, according to the statement of appellant's attorney, on the issue of consent. However, we do not find in the record that the issue of consent was raised by the evidence.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Roper v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1964
- Ross v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1910
- Jackson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- Fite v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1940
- Graham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1933
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Demers v. StateSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1988
- Brewer v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1989
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1982
- Holloway v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1985
- State v. WhiteOhio Court of Appeals · 2017
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.