Legal Opinion

Sharp v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)

Decided December 22, 2006No. 07-05-0285-CRPublishedCited by 26 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Opinion

BRIAN QUINN, Chief Justice.

Robert Edward Sharp (appellant) appeals his conviction for indecency with a child. Via various issues, he contends that the trial court erred by 1) allowing the State’s investigator to remain in the courtroom once the rule was invoked, 2) permitting a witness to impart hearsay when the State failed to comply with article 38.072 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 3) admitting appellant’s pen packet without proper authentication, and 4) allowing the State to reopen during punishment after it had rested. We affirm.

Issue One — Rule 614

In his first issue,…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Cardenas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  2. Broxton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1995
  3. Prystash v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
  4. Hernandez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
  5. Beheler v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1999

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

3Cited by26 opinions

  1. Gonzalez v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2011
  2. Prieto v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2011
  3. Allen Pena A/K/A Alan Pena v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2013
  4. Andrew Castillo v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2024
  5. Benjamin Curcuru v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2010

21 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