Skip to main content

Hicks v. State

Citations

  • 860 S.W.2d 419
  • 1993 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 64
  • 1993 WL 92689

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that “[w]hen an indictment alleges that the manner or means of inflicting the injury is unknown and the evidence at trial does not establish the type of weapon used, a prima facie showing is made that the weapon was unknown to the grand jury”
  • requiring the State to prove that the grand jury exercised due diligence, but was unable to decipher the means of committing the offense
  • requiring the State to prove that the grand jury exercised due diligence, but was unable to decipher the means of committing the offense
  • declining to address Sixth Amendment issues because appellant did not brief them correctly
  • autopsy photograph admissible despite depiction of “postmortem animal scavenging”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Maloney, Clinton, Miller

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

22 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.