Perkins v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
SUPPLEMENTAL OPINION
McCLURE, Justice.
Appellant has filed a petition for discretionary review in which he asserts that this Court erred in holding that it could not take judicial notice of two scientific studies in evaluating Appellant’s claim of the State’s use of perjured testimony by Dr. Robert McLaughlin. He argues that the petition should be granted because our opinion decides an important question of state law in conflict with an applicable decision of the Court of Criminal Appeals, namely, Emerson v. State, 880 S.W.2d 759 (Tex.Crim.App.1994). See Tex.R.App.P. 200(c)(3). Pursuant to…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Emerson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1994
- Rochelle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- Montes v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1994
3Cited by23 opinions
- Ryan v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)1996
- Anderson v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)2000
- Bonilla v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1996
- Abel Luna v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)2015
- Al Jessep v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2006
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.