White, Garcia Glen
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the CourtKeller, P.J.
KEASLER, HERVEY, RICHARDSON, YEARY and NEWELL, JJ., joined.
In this death-penalty case, in a subsequent habeas application, applicant claims that, if certain newly .discovered scientific evidence had been available at trial, it would likely have changed the jury’s answers to the special issues'. Applicant claims that this new evidence entitles him to relief under Article 11.073.1 We conclude that it does not, because evidence that would have changed only punishment does not satisfy Article 11.073’s requirement that the new evidence show that applicant “would not have been convicted.”…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Ring v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
- Herrera v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Wesbrook v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
- United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 1988
- Sawyer v. WhitleySupreme Court of the United States · 1992
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by21 opinions
- Arteaga v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2017
- Oliva v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2018
- Garner v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2017
- Ex parte KussmaulCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2018
- Carolyn Loewen v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2016
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.