Huerta v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• affirming where trial counsel failed to object to the details of a prior conviction and possible gang affiliation used for impeachment
• defendant’s prior convictions in 2005 and 2006 were “near in time to the charged offense” and favored admissibility when the charged offense was committed in 2009
• A defense attorney may choose to elicit testimony from the accused as to his prior conviction to remove the sting from an attack that would otherwise come from the State.
• Counsel may refrain from objecting to prejudicial evidence in an effort to make appellant appear more honest, to minimize the seriousness of the earlier offense, or to avoid drawing unwanted attention to a particular issue.
• “Theft is a crime of moral turpitude involving elements of deception.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).