Duncan v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that instruction that “intent or knowledge may be inferred by acts done or words spoken” is improper because it “singles out a specific type of evidence and tells the jury it may infer an element of the crime”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Torres v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2001-10-18· cited 13×
• Larry Alton Miller v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2005-08-31
• Wilmer Cruz v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2002-02-28
• Alvin Ray Cooper v. Officer Gilbert Carlos and Officer Terry Mitchell
  Tex. App. Ct., 7th Dist. (Amarillo)· 2003-02-13
• Kenneth Lawrence, Jr. v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 7th Dist. (Amarillo)· 2009-08-19
• Terrance Adrian Campbell v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 11th Dist. (Eastland)· 2003-09-04
• Hector Mario Gonzalez v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2016-03-17
• Krystal Nicole Lerma v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2020-03-26
• Creshawn Dupri Howard v. the State of Texas
  Tex. App. Ct., 11th Dist. (Eastland)· 2023-11-16

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Cain v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1997-06-18· cited 1,033×
• Aguirre-Mata v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1999-05-26· cited 176×
• Edwards v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 1996-04-18· cited 106×