Skip to main content

Clarke v. State

Citations

  • 270 S.W.3d 573
  • 2008 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 853
  • 2008 WL 4331008

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that appellant must present argument to trial judge in time for him to rule on it to preserve claim on appeal
  • holding that appellant preserved error by arguing Brady claim at hearing on motion for new trial
  • holding that appellant preserved error by arguing Brady claim at hearing on motion for new trial
  • concluding that, to preserve error for appellate review, “a particular argument relied upon on appeal must have been presented to the trial court”
  • holding that the appellant had preserved his Brady claim for appellate review, even though he did not specifically cite Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), in his motion for new trial
  • recognizing that while it is not necessary that appellant specifically refer to Brady to preserve the complaint, his objection nonetheless must be sufficiently specific to make the trial court aware of the complaint

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran, Meyers, Price, Womack, Johnson, Holcomb, Keller, Keasler, Hervey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

64 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Clarke v. State

97 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.