Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 5/25/2005

Johnson v. State

Citations

169 S.W.3d 223
2005 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 818
2005 WL 1225158

How courts have described this case

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

holding that harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard of review is inappropriate for errors flowing solely from defense counsel
holding that harmless beyond a reasonable doubt standard of review is inappropriate for errors flowing solely from defense counsel
holding that Strickland harm analysis applies to all misconduct claims flowing from conduct of defense counsel unless claims involve a complete denial of counsel, a conflict of interest, or a structural defect [1]
providing that an allegation that defendant’s right to testify was denied by defense counsel is analyzed under both prongs of Strickland
holding, if error is not attributable to trial court and is not structural, then error is analyzed under Strickland for harm; holding complete denial of right to testify by defense counsel is subject to Strickland analysis
noting the types of errors held to be structural by the United States Supreme Court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keller, Meyers, Hervey, Holcomb, Cochran, Price, Womack, Johnson, Keasler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

138 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.