Skip to main content

Cornet v. State

Citations

  • 359 S.W.3d 217
  • 2012 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 105
  • 2012 WL 204286

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that statutory “medical-care defense” was subject to the confession and avoidance doctrine because it “does not negate any element of the offense, including culpable intent; it only excuses what would otherwise constitute criminal conduct”
  • reasoning that Legislature sought only to protect conduct that is “medically” relevant to child’s health and well-being and conduct that confers “medical” benefit on child
  • noting that, “when the Legislature desires to convey a certain level of specificity within a statutory provision, it knows how to do it”
  • explaining that availability of defense does not turn on “accused’s familiarity with the science of medicine” but upon nature of conduct
  • reasoning that Legislature sought only to protect conduct that is “medically” relevant to child’s health and well-being and conduct that confers “medical” benefit on child
  • explaining that “when the Legislature desires to convey a certain level of specificity within a statutory provision, it knows how to do it”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Price, Iiai, Keller, Womack, Johnson, Alcala, Cochran, Meyers, Keasler, Hervey

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.