Cargando…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; 529 S.W.2d 533. Datos: https://static.case.law/sw2d/529/cases/0533-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
Lewis v. State, 529 S.W.2d 533 (Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 1975) OPINION MORRISON, Judge. The offense is conspiracy to commit arson under Article 1622, V.A.P.C.; the punishment, five years. The State’s case was that two men had been hired by the appellant to burn down a certain building belonging to a business competitor. Police officers were informed of the plan and intervened in time to prevent the fire. One of the arsonists was killed. Appellant did not testify and called no witnesses, other than to recall one of the officers who had testified for the State. We are met at the outset with a question of improper jury argument at the guilt stage of the trial. There were two prosecutors and two defense counsel involved in the trial. Prosecutor Whaley argued, “John Ovard [the other prosecutor] and I have taken a solemn oath to God to seek justice. You judge whether or not we have done it. No such oath bears on either one of these attorneys [defense counsel].” (Emphasis added) After the court had sustained appellant’s objection, the prosecutor continued, “All right. I would ask you to believe this: If, assuming this man is guilty, do they [defense counsel] want the truth in here before you?” When defense counsel objected and stated that they were officers of the court under the same obligation, Whaley replied, “That is not so, Your Honor.” We do not find this argument to be in response to the defense counsel’s reference to the trial as an adversary proceeding. The effect…
Fuente: Caselaw Access Project, Harvard Law School Library Innovation Lab (static.case.law); Texas Court of Criminal Appeals; 529 S.W.2d 533. Datos: https://static.case.law/sw2d/529/cases/0533-01.json. Opinión judicial de EE.UU. sin restricciones conocidas de uso: CAP levantó las restricciones el 2024-03-01 (prensa); el espejo HF free-law declara cc0-1.0; NO c… Abrir la fuente
Cargando el texto completo…
Lewis v. State, 529 S.W.2d 533 (Texas Court of Criminal Appeals, 1975) OPINION MORRISON, Judge. The offense is conspiracy to commit arson under Article 1622, V.A.P.C.; the punishment, five years. The State’s case was that two men had been hired by the appellant to burn down a certain building belonging to a business competitor. Police officers were informed of the plan and intervened in time to prevent the fire. One of the arsonists was killed. Appellant did not testify and called no witnesses, other than to recall one of the officers who had testified for the State. We are met at the outset with a question of improper jury argument at the guilt stage of the trial. There were two prosecutors and two defense counsel involved in the trial. Prosecutor Whaley argued, “John Ovard [the other prosecutor] and I have taken a solemn oath to God to seek justice. You judge whether or not we have done it. No such oath bears on either one of these attorneys [defense counsel].” (Emphasis added) After the court had sustained appellant’s objection, the prosecutor continued, “All right. I would ask you to believe this: If, assuming this man is guilty, do they [defense counsel] want the truth in here before you?” When defense counsel objected and stated that they were officers of the court under the same obligation, Whaley replied, “That is not so, Your Honor.” We do not find this argument to be in response to the defense counsel’s reference to the trial as an adversary proceeding. The effect…