Chapa v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the appellant’s argument that the prosecutor 25 made an improper closing argument “ha[d] not been preserved for appeal because appellant failed to object to the prosecutor’s closing argument at the time”
• claim that State commented on defendant’s decision not to testify was not preserved for appeal where defendant failed to object when the statement was made
• claim that State commented on defendant’s decision not to testify was not preserved for appeal where defendant failed to object when the statement was made

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).