Smith v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WOODLEY, Presiding Judge.
The offense is robbery; the punishment, enhanced under Art. 63, Vernon’s Ann.P. C, life.
Able court appointed counsel on appeal sets forth in his brief filed in the trial court four grounds of error.
Ground No. 1 complains that the trial court erred in admitting testimony that a witness had identified appellant at a lineup conducted in the absence of his counsel, thereby unconstitutionally depriving appellant of his right to effective assistance of counsel and due process of law.
The only reference to a showup or lineup during the trial before the jury was during…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Gilbert v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Harrington v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
- Martinez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1969
- Rogers v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1960
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Wallace v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- Langham v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- Garcia v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- Piper v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972
- Mason v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.