Filter This View

  • Ex parte Boyd

    Publication Date: 2001-10-25
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2001-10-24
    Court: Tex. Crim. App.
    Judge: Holcomb, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: NO. 74,121

    FROM THE 291st DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTYOPINIONWe ordered applicant Michael Keith Boyd's post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus filed and set for submission to determine w

  • Gonzales v. State

    Publication Date: 2010-04-30
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2010-04-28
    Court: Tex. Crim. App.
    Judge: Holcomb, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: PD-0882-08

    OPINIONIn this case, we must determine whether appellant's 1987 offense was a final conviction for enhancement purposes. We hold that it was and reverse the judgment of the court of appeals.Back

  • Ex parte Waggoner

    Publication Date: 2001-12-06
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2001-12-05
    Court: Tex. Crim. App.
    Judge: Holcomb, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: NO. 74,133

    FROM THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 2 OF DALLAS COUNTYOPINIONWe ordered applicant Billy Joe Waggoner's post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus filed and set for submission to de

  • Raymond Deleon Martinez v. the State of Texas

    Publication Date: 2010-12-19
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2010-12-15
    Court: Tex. Crim. App.
    Judge: Holcomb, J
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: AP-76,140

    Holcomb, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Keller, P.J., and Price, Womack, Johnson, Keasler, Hervey, and Cochran, JJ., joined. Meyers, J., dissented.Appellant was convicted of ca

  • McCarty v. State

    Publication Date: 2008-06-26
    Practice Area:
    Industry:
    Date Filed: 2008-06-25
    Court: Tex. Crim. App.
    Judge: Holcomb, J.
    Attorneys: For plaintiff:
    for defendant:
    Case Number: PD-1139-07

    OPINIONIn this case, we must determine whether, under Texas Rule of Evidence 803(2), the event about which an excited utterance is made has to be the same event that caused the declarant's exciteme