Hollander, Joe Shawn
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Concurrence
OPINION
COCHRAN, J.,
filed a concurring opinion.
I join the majority opinion. I write separately to emphasize that appellant suffered egregious harm in this case because of the improper use of a permissive presumption that was given to the jury as an unconstitutional mandatory presumption. The moral of this story is that trial judges should not include a reference to any statutory presumption in the jury charge unless they have very carefully included all of the language of Section 2.05(a)(2) of the Penal Code which deals with charging the jury on presumptions.1 Most of the time jury charges…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- Carella v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Ward v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2002