The state's repetition of the name of the offense was not harmful because: 1. the jury would have known ofthe nature of the offense even if the trial court had accepted the stipulation and prevented mention at any stage except the indictment; 2. the character conformity inference of the prior conviction was not particularly strong; 3. the conviction itself was for one of the less serious offenses subject to the registration statute; and 4. the evidence supporting the conviction was substantial.
October 18, 2004 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Texas Lawyer
Presented by BigVoodoo
Honoring outstanding legal achievements focused at the national level, largely around Big Law and in-house departments.
Women Leaders in Consulting Awards honors the industry standouts and rising stars who are making a mark within the profession.
Join General Counsel and Senior Legal Leaders at the Premier Forum Designed For and by General Counsel from Fortune 1000 Companies
General Statement of DutiesPerforms legal work involving full litigation of all types of matters both for and against the Town, including al...
Shipman & Goodwin LLP is seeking a attorney to expand our national commercial real estate lending practice. Candidates should have a mi...
Health Law Associate CT Shipman is seeking an associate to join our national longstanding health law practice. Candidates must have t...
