Gomez v. State
Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)
1DissentMurphy, Justice
I respectfully dissent. The majority holds that an exhibit is not exclusively part of the statement of facts; therefore, Rule 50(e) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure does not apply when the exhibit is lost or destroyed without appellant’s fault. In reaching this conclusion, the majority disregards precedent set by this Court in which we held the court reporter’s records include exhibits incorporated in the statement of facts, and found Rule 50(e) applicable when the exhibits were lost or destroyed. See Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. Chatham, 899 S.W.2d 722, 731-32 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Harris v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1989
- Dunn v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1987
- Superior Packing, Inc. v. Worldwide Leasing & Financing, Inc.Court of Appeals of Texas · 1994
- Perez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. ChathamCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1995
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.