Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Englund v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)

Decided September 28, 1995No. 01-94-00774-CRPublished

1ConcurrenceCohen, Justice

I agree that the fax was admissible as a duplicate, but conclude that it was also admissible as an “original” certified copy under rules 1001 and 1002.

As the State notes in its motion for rehearing, a document that is a “copy” in the ' colloquial sense of the word may actually *940qualify as an “original” document legally. An “original” of a writing is defined as the writing itself or “any counterpart intended to have the same effect by a person executing or issuing it.” Tex.R.CRIM.Evid. 1001(3) (emphasis added). A “counterpart” is defined as a “duplicate or copy.” Black’s Law DICTIONARY 315 (5th…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API