Skip to main content

Duran v. State

Citations

  • 552 S.W.2d 840
  • 1977 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1189

How courts have described this case

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

  • finding an officer’s testimony that a substance was heroin insufficient to meet the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt standard
  • A conviction must be reversed if the stipulated evidence does not comply with Article 1.15 and the other evidence presented is insufficient to support a conviction
  • A conviction must be reversed if the stipulated evidence does not comply with Article 1.15 and the other evidence presented is insufficient to support a conviction
  • experienced narcotics officer not qualified to testify that brown powdered substance was heroin

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Dally, Douglas, Brumley, Odom

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

20 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

12 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.