Skip to main content

Freeman v. State

Citations

  • 340 S.W.3d 717
  • 2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 387
  • 2011 WL 891266

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that the effects of pretrial publicity 'were adequately explored through a hearing on the motion to change venué and voir dire, and no prejudice was found
  • holding that defendant failed to preserve the constitutional claims he had raised in two pre-trial motions because he merely requested an acquittal in a motion for a directed verdict at the trial court level
  • holding that defendant failed to preserve the constitutional claims he had raised in two pre-trial motions because he merely requested an acquittal in a motion for a directed verdict at the trial court level
  • holding State's argument that the defendant tried \to commit the worst criminal act on law enforcement ever in the United States' history\ improper
  • holding that a comment that a defendant “tried with all he could” to “commit the worst criminal act on law enforcement ever in the United States’ history,” was not a matter of MUHAMMAD –99 common knowledge
  • concluding prosecutor’s closing argument that referred to facts that were neither in evidence nor inferable from evidence was improper but non-constitutional error

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Meyers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

31 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.