Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 5/10/1978

Graham v. State

Citations

566 S.W.2d 941
1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1157

How courts have described this case

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

stating that' although jurors may not arbitrarily disregard expert testimony as to insanity, neither may they give conclusive effect to such testimony
noting that “[a]fter counsel objected the court instructed the prosecutor to confine his remarks to the record” and that “[n]o adverse ruling was obtained”
noting that the circumstances of the crime itself are important in determining the mental state of the accused at the time of the commission of the offense
stating that issue of insanity is not strictly one of a medical fact because it also includes an \inarticulate ethical component\ that is properly left to the jury's discretion
stating that although jurors We cannot conclude that the evidence supporting appellant's may not arbitrarily disregard expert testimony as to insanity, affirmative defense so greatly outweighs the State's contrary neither may they give conclusive effect to such testimony
noting for a mixed medical and factual issue such as insanity, the jury could disregard even uncontradicted expert testimony

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Odom

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Graham v. State

545 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.