Legal Opinion

State v. Medrano

Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)

Decided September 19, 2002No. 08-97-00492-CRPublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SUSAN LARSEN, Justice.

This State’s appeal involves the trial court’s exclusion of hypnotically-enhanced testimony from the only eyewitness in a capital murder case. We affirm the trial court’s ruling and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Upon our original consideration of this State’s appeal, we determined that we had no jurisdiction to consider the trial court’s exclusion of evidence, relying upon the authority of State v. Roberts, 940 S.W.2d 655, 658 (Tex.Crim.App.1996). See State v. Medrano, 987 S.W.2d 600, 603-04 (Tex.App.-El Paso 1999). The Court of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Guzman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1997
  2. Frye v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1923
  3. Kelly v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
  4. State v. RobertsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
  5. State v. MedranoCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2002

6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. State v. MedranoCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004
  2. State v. DeAngelis, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2003
  3. State v. Martinez, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2003
  4. State of Texas v. Medrano, MatthewCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004
  5. State of Texas v. Medrano, MatthewCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004

4 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