Skip to main content

Ford v. State

Citations

  • 73 S.W.3d 923
  • 2002 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94
  • 2002 WL 811311

How courts have described this case

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

  • “Under our harmless error rule the violation of a mandatory statute does not, by itself, call for the reversal of a conviction.”
  • “Under our harmless error rule the violation of a mandatory statute does not, by itself, call for the reversal of a conviction.”
  • “[W]e presume that jurors are qualified absent some indication in the record to the contrary.”
  • “Under our harmless error rule the violation of a mandatory statute does not, by itself, call for the reversal of a conviction.”
  • “violation of a mandatory statute” rationale “would re-establish automatic reversible error, contrary to the language and purpose of Rule 44.2 and contrary to our opinion in Cain”
  • error in application of statutory protection subject to harm analysis where protection does not fall within the very limited class of “structural” error immunized from harm analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

22 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.