Skip to main content

Harrison v. State

Citations

  • 187 S.W.3d 429
  • 2005 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2119
  • 2005 WL 3408208

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that “[m]ere 47 conclusions and general averments are not sufficient for the court to determine their materiality”
  • noting that a motion for new trial represents a second opportunity, before appeal, for the defendant to demonstrate that the missing evidence is material to the case
  • motion that advised trial court of identity and information counsel hoped to obtain from that witness was sufficient to preserve claim
  • “If an appellant seeks a new trial based on the denial of a motion for continuance for an absent witness, he must file a sworn motion for new trial, stating the testimony that the missing witness would have provided.”
  • “If an appellant seeks a new trial based on the denial of a motion for continuance for an absent witness, he must file a sworn motion for new trial, stating the testimony that the missing witness would have provided.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Price

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

14 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.