Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Allen v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)

Decided August 22, 2007No. 10-06-00294-CRPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTom Gray, Chief Justice

In this case we must reconcile two lines of Court of Criminal Appeals’ opinions. First is the line of cases which holds that if the State fails to meet its burden of proof to establish an enhancement allegation, “a harmless error analysis should not be undertaken.” Russell v. State, 790 S.W.2d 655, 656 (Tex.Crim.App.1990). As Justice Vance notes, it appears to have been recently reaffirmed in Fletcher v. State, 214 S.W.3d 5, 8 (Tex.Crim.App.2007). The other line of cases is that “[ejxcept for certain federal constitutional errors labeled by the United States Supreme Court as ‘structural,’ no…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cain v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1997
  2. Garrett v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
  3. Russell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
  4. Holt v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1995

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API