Legal Opinion

Holloman v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)

Decided June 9, 1997No. 07-96-0267-CRPublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

QUINN, Justice.

Randall Wayne Holloman, appellant, appeals his conviction for assault and asserts one point of error. Through the latter, he argues that the trial court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on self-defense. We sustain the point and reverse.

Standard of Review

An accused is entitled to an affirmative instruction on any defensive issue raised by the evidence. Hamel v. State, 916 S.W.2d 491, 493 (Tex.Crim.App.1996); Hutcheson v. State, 899 S.W.2d 39, 42 (Tex.App.-Amarillo 1995, pet. ref'd). This is true irrespective of whether we or the trial court believe the evidence feeble,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Hamel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
  2. Willis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
  3. Sanders v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  4. Golden v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
  5. Halbert v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1994

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Jackson v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2003
  2. Withers v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1999
  3. Hubbard v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2004
  4. Torres v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1999
  5. Arispe, Jr., Armando Villarrreal v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2003

21 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