<?xml version="1.0" encoding="US-ASCII"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">
<channel>

<title>FindLaw Opinion Summaries - TX Crim App</title>
<link>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/casesummary/index.html</link>
<description>Daily opinion summaries from the Texas Criminal Court of Appeals, brought to you by FindLaw.com.</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:00:02 PDT</lastBuildDate>
<copyright>Copyright: (C) FindLaw </copyright>

<thespringbox:skin xmlns:thespringbox="http://www.thespringbox.com/dtds/thespringbox-1.0.dtd">http://feeds.findlaw.com/FindLawTXCrimApp?format=skin</thespringbox:skin><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/FindLawTXCrimApp" type="application/rss+xml" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com" /><item>
<title>Gonzales v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/aJh6eLy29QA/getcase.pl</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Sentencing) Defendant's capital murder conviction is affirmed where there was ample independent corroborative evidence rendering it more probable than it would have been otherwise that the victim's death was caused by the criminal act of another, and thus Defendant was not convicted solely on the basis of his confession.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=aJh6eLy29QA:0nnMx3tlrug:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/aJh6eLy29QA" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18487&amp;invol=1</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18487&amp;invol=1</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Johnson v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/bV0xJyH6AXw/getcase.pl</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence, Sentencing) Defendant's indecency with a child sentence is vacated where the trial court lacked discretion to impose jail time as a condition of community supervision immediately after he heard unsworn, un-crossexamined victim-allocution statements that they wanted Defendant to go to jail.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=bV0xJyH6AXw:d0YYoM08LHw:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/bV0xJyH6AXw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18504&amp;invol=1</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18504&amp;invol=1</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Esparza v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/Z4qAf3LVao0/getcase.pl</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 13 May 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure) The denial of Defendant's post-conviction motion for DNA testing is reversed, where evidence presented at trial of the victim's prior sexual encounter did not preclude Defendant from establishing by a preponderance of the evidence that the tests showed he was not the perpetrator.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=Z4qAf3LVao0:UVbZVWYrg44:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/Z4qAf3LVao0" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18367&amp;invol=1</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18367&amp;invol=1</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Ex Parte Watson</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/TXmcdkWeDAQ/getcase.pl</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 6 May 2009 20:00:05 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure) Defendant's intoxication assault conviction is affirmed, where the offense of failure to yield right of way is not a lesser included offense of intoxication assault, and thus the government did not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause due to its previous prosecution of Defendant for failure to yield the right of way.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=TXmcdkWeDAQ:fQMsPNDFcb0:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/TXmcdkWeDAQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18334&amp;invol=1</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18334&amp;invol=1</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Smith v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/LT0mbjDmr64/getcase.pl</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 6 May 2009 20:00:05 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Sentencing) Capital murder conviction is affirmed, over Defendant's arguments that the trial court amended the indictment to charge that the two murders committed by Defendant occurred "during the same transaction," because Defendant had notice that he was being charged with capital murder and prepared for his defense accordingly.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=LT0mbjDmr64:lLPPV2-UrT0:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/LT0mbjDmr64" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18347&amp;invol=1</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=tx&amp;vol=app/18347&amp;invol=1</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Ex Parte Reedy</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/oZh301iMKwI/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Ethics &amp; Professional Responsibility, Habeas Corpus) In a murder prosecution, the denial of Petitioner's habeas petition is affirmed in part, where Petitioner waived his right to claim that his guilty plea was coerced, but reversed in part, where Petitioner's waiver was invalid with respect to his claim of ineffective assistance of counsel.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=oZh301iMKwI:gCCg5BoMVp0:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/oZh301iMKwI" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18294&amp;FILENAME=AP-75,862#2.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18294&amp;FILENAME=AP-75,862#2.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Simmons v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/1ra2dsZKUZQ/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) The reversal of Defendant's aggravated robbery conviction is reversed, where Defendant argued that the state only offered accomplice testimony in obtaining Defendant's conviction and that Tex. Code Crim. Proc. section 38.14 thus barred the conviction, but in fact a reasonable jury could have convicted based on the non-accomplice evidence.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=1ra2dsZKUZQ:RDHOZH8CUaI:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/1ra2dsZKUZQ" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18293&amp;FILENAME=PD-0791-08.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18293&amp;FILENAME=PD-0791-08.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Barrios v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/6fgsawxqc_Y/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure) Defendant's murder conviction is affirmed, where the trial court properly instructed the jury that it must acquit Defendant of murder before it could consider the lesser included offense of robbery, and the instruction was sufficiently clear.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=6fgsawxqc_Y:h-rcP0VS0Ow:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/6fgsawxqc_Y" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18292&amp;FILENAME=PD-0891-08.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18292&amp;FILENAME=PD-0891-08.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Villarreal v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/xLHXF57GLmk/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 20:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure) Defendant's conviction for violating a protective order is affirmed, where the evidence was sufficient to allow a reasonable jury to convict because it showed that Defendant, despite a prior order not to engage in "family violence" against the victim, did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=xLHXF57GLmk:HWKxGlZw_WQ:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/xLHXF57GLmk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18295&amp;FILENAME=PD-0984-08.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18295&amp;FILENAME=PD-0984-08.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
<item>
<title>Woodall v. State</title>
<link>http://feeds.findlaw.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~3/-UQGZXncWWg/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP</link>
<pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:00:02 PDT</pubDate>
<description>(Tex. Crim. App., Criminal Law &amp; Procedure, Evidence) Defendant's driving while intoxicated conviction is reversed, where Defendant failed to preserve his claim that the trial court refused to permit Defendant to impeach the state's expert, as defense counsel told the trial court he would make a proffer but never did so.&lt;div class="feedflare"&gt;
&lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:yIl2AUoC8zA"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=yIl2AUoC8zA" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:F7zBnMyn0Lo" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?i=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:V_sGLiPBpWU" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href="http://feeds.findlaw.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?a=-UQGZXncWWg:7gX4JTunBRU:l6gmwiTKsz0"&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~ff/FindLawTXCrimApp?d=l6gmwiTKsz0" border="0"&gt;&lt;/img&gt;&lt;/a&gt;
&lt;/div&gt;&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/FindLawTXCrimApp/~4/-UQGZXncWWg" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</guid>
<feedburner:origLink>http://www.cca.courts.state.tx.us/OPINIONS/PDFOPINIONINFO2.ASP?OPINIONID=18285&amp;FILENAME=PD-0453-07 THRU 0460-07.PDF</feedburner:origLink></item>
</channel>
</rss>
