Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 9/11/2002
Hayes v. State
Citations
- 85 S.W.3d 809
- 2002 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 154
- 2002 WL 31019283
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- concluding that autopsy photographs showing entry and exit wounds were relevant to explain the way in which the victim was killed
- holding alterations of body by autopsy process are of minor significance when disturbing nature of photographs derive primarily from injuries sustained
- holding alterations of body by autopsy process are of minor significance when disturbing nature of photographs derive primarily from injuries sustained
- stating that autopsy photographs are generally admissible unless they depict mutilation caused by the autopsy itself
- stating that the circumstances of the offense alone may be sufficient to support an affirmative answer to the future dangerousness special issue
- stating that in cases of non- constitutional error, “any error that does not affect a substantial right of the appellant is harmless”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Womack
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
222 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Gardner v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2009-10-21· cited 640×
- Young v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2009-04-22· cited 604×
- Pena, Jose LuisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2011-09-28· cited 438×
- Devoe, Paul GilbertCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2011-12-14· cited 430×
- Rayford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2003-11-19· cited 305×
- Guevara v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2003-01-15· cited 187×
- Moreno Denoso v. StateTex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2005-02-03· cited 87×
- Render v. StateTex. App. Ct., 11th Dist. (Eastland)· 2011-08-18· cited 78×
- Moore v. StateTex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2004-07-21· cited 72×
- Wright v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2005-11-17· cited 71×
- Orr v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 2010-02-18· cited 53×
- Flores v. StateTex. App. Ct., 8th Dist. (El Paso)· 2010-01-13· cited 42×
- Badillo v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2008-01-02· cited 38×
- Jones v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2007-08-01· cited 37×
- William Owens v. StateTex. App. Ct., 6th Dist. (Texarkana)· 2012-09-19· cited 33×
- Martinez v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2004-11-24· cited 28×
- Ex Parte GravesTex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2008-11-05· cited 26×
- Williams v. StateTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2004-11-24· cited 23×
- Saxer v. StateTex. App. Ct., 9th Dist. (Beaumont)· 2003-08-29· cited 23×
- Kerry Gittens v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2018-07-31· cited 23×
Cites
13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court· 1979-10-01· cited 79,490×
- Brady v. MarylandSupreme Court· 1963-05-13· cited 33,902×
- Montgomery v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1991-06-19· cited 7,264×
- United States v. AgursSupreme Court· 1976-06-24· cited 6,537×
- Jones v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1996-12-18· cited 2,034×
- Santellan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1997-01-29· cited 1,995×
- Ladd v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1999-10-06· cited 1,900×
- Wyatt v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2000-05-03· cited 1,327×
- Rojas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1998-09-23· cited 428×
- Schutz v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2001-12-19· cited 231×
- Kunkle v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1986-06-18· cited 227×
- Havard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1990-11-28· cited 215×
- Jackson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1977-06-22· cited 77×
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.