David Jose Somoza v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that admission of evidence in violation of Fed.R.Evid. 404(b) did not violate defendant’s right to due process
• ruling that due process was not violated by introduction of evidence made inadmissible under Rule 404(b) of the Evidence Rules
• ruling that due process was not violated by introduction of evidence made inadmissible under Rule 404(b) of the Evidence Rules
• holding that presentation of specific evidence in one trial does not forever bar government from introducing same evidence in later proceeding
• holding that a court may admit evidence of any relevant extraneous offense, even if the offense was one for which the accused was charged and acquitted
• holding that admission of evidence relating to a crime the defendant had previously been acquitted of committing did not violate double jeopardy or due process

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).