Skip to main content

Garcia v. State

Citations

  • 981 S.W.2d 683
  • 1998 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 160
  • 1998 WL 827683

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that State’s failure to comply with outcry notice requirements was waived by appellant’s failure to raise objection on these grounds at trial
  • holding that an indictment need not specify the precise date when the charged offense occurred because time usually is not a material element of an offense
  • holding that (1) time is not material element of offense, (2) primary purpose of specifying date in indictment is not to notify accused of date of offense but rather to show prosecution not barred by statute of limitations, and (3
  • noting that the State may use an “on or about” date if it does not know the precise or even approximate date that the offense occurred
  • noting that the State may use an A on or about @ date if it does not know the precise or even approximate date that the offense occurred
  • explaining that time is not a material element of an offense, and, in some cases, it is impossible for the State to know precisely, or even approximately, when the charged offense occurred

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Mansfield, Meyers, McCormick, Keller, Price, Womack, Holland, Baird, Overstreet

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

23 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.