Legal Opinion · Dissent

Powell v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 12, 1995No. 71270Published

1DissentBaird, Judge

Believing the collateral estoppel doctrine prohibits the admission of evidence of an offense for which one has been acquitted, I respectfiilly dissent to the resolution of the seventh, eighth and ninth points of error.

I

As a general rule extraneous offenses are irrelevant and inadmissible. Castillo v. State, 739 S.W.2d 280, 289 (Tex.Cr.App.1987); and, McCann v. State, 606 S.W.2d 897, 899-900 (Tex.Cr.App.1980). However, Tex.Code Crim.ProeAnn. art. 37.071 provides for the introduction of any evidence the trial judge deems relevant at the punishment phase of a capital murder trial. Therefore,…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Ashe v. SwensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
  2. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  3. Harris v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
  4. Kemp v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
  5. Adanandus v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993

9 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