Skip to main content

Lewis v. State

Citations

  • 676 S.W.2d 136
  • 1984 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 711

How courts have described this case

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

  • \The intent element in this case can only be proved by inferences from the evidence presented.\
  • “The intent element in this case can only be proved by inferences from the evidence presented.”
  • \The intent element in this case can only be proved by inferences from the evidence presented.\
  • A The intent element in this case can only be proved by inferences from the evidence presented. @
  • “The photographs [of the complainant] are relevant in helping the jury to determine whether appellant had the intent to arouse or gratify his sexual desires when he touched the complainant during the photography sessions.”
  • where defense argued A [the State] knows that its case stinks to high heaven and they don = t want to search for the truth here, @ the State = s response that a prosecutor had a duty to seek justice, was not improper

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Onion, Davis, Teague

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 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.