Skip to main content

Lopez v. State

Citations

  • 928 S.W.2d 528
  • 1996 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 59
  • 1996 WL 230192

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that law violates ex post facto prohibitions in federal and state constitutions if it “deprives one charged with a crime of any defenses that were available when the act was committed”
  • intervening judicial decision permitting use of deadly weapon finding for \unknown object\ allegations was sufficient to rebut presumption of vindictiveness, thus allowing State to seek deadly weapon finding at second trial when one was not sought at first trial
  • evidence, not admissible to correct a false= impression regarding defendant’s behavior on drugs when the State asked appellant on cross-examination about his behavior on drugs
  • evidence of prior misconduct inadmissible because State had prompted or maneuvered defendant into leaving false impression about his prior criminal history
  • E vidence is not admissible to correct a false impression created by “prompting or maneuvering”
  • State could not create a false impression on cross-examination in order to open door to extraneous act evidence

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Overstreet, Baird, Mansfield, Keller, Clinton, White, McCormick

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

39 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.