Carroll, Timothy Earl v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)
1Dissent
DISSENTING OPINION
DON BURGESS, Justice.
I vigorously dissent. Obviously I dissent to the result, see Carroll v. State, 997 S.W.2d 399 (Tex.App.-Beaumont 1999), but my real dissent is to the majority’s determination of “the scope of the instant remand.”
The Scope of the Remand
The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, in their unpublished opinion,1 stated:... The court of appeals did not perform a harmless error analysis. The State petitioned this Court to review the court of appeals’ failure to conduct a harm analysis.
This court recently decided that the erroneous denial of a defense challenge for…
Also in this document: Per curiam.
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Penry v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1995
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
- Trevino v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
- Green v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Faulder v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1987
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.