Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dudley v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)

Decided October 24, 2001No. 09-00-481-CRPublished

1DissentDon Burgess, Justice

I respectfully dissent to the disposition of point of error one. While this is an important case, it is a relatively simple one. Dudley attacks the legal sufficiency of the evidence concerning the concentration of the codeine possessed.

Dudley was originally indicted for possession of penalty group 1 codeine, but the State amended the indictment to allege possession of penalty group 4 codeine. The application paragraph of the jury charge instructed the jury to consider if Dudley “possessed a controlled substance listed in Penalty Group 4 of the Texas Controlled Substance Act, namely,…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
  2. Burks v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
  3. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
  4. EI Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. RobinsonTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Greene v. MasseySupreme Court of the United States · 1978

12 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