Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Hollander, Joe Shawn

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided December 11, 2013No. PD-1447-12Published

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

  1. Sandstrom v. MontanaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Francis v. FranklinSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
  3. County Court of Ulster Cty. v. AllenSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Carella v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
  5. Ward v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API