Legal Opinion
Hale v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided June 9, 2004No. 2-03-143-CR, 2-03-144-CR, 2-03-145-CRPublishedCited by 57 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON STATE’S AMENDED PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
SUE WALKER, Justice.
I. Introduction
Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 50, we withdraw our March 25, 2004 opinion and judgments and substitute the following. Tex.R.App. P. 50. We clarify that we address Appellant Shane Lee Hale’s complaint under only the United States Constitution and that we apply rule 44.2(a)’s constitutional harm analysis to the trial court’s ruling that the testimonial statement of an accomplice is admissible against Hale. Tex.R.App. P. 44.2(a).
The trial court denied Hale’s pretrial motion to exclude a…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Crawford v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- Delaware v. Van ArsdallSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Davis v. AlaskaSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Pointer v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Lilly v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by57 opinions
- Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2006
- Davis v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2005
- Rangel v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2006
- McClenton v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2005
- Moore v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2005
52 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.