Skip to main content

Marshall v. State

Citations

  • 185 S.W.3d 899
  • 2006 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 360
  • 2006 WL 335906

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that defendant must object when he has “notice that the proceedings may have gone amiss,” and he has this notice when he learns that the State is seeking a higher penalty despite the enhancement allegations not being read
  • applying same requirement to enhancement allegations set forth in document separate from indictment
  • distinguishing defect arising from procedural trial error from lack of evidentiary support
  • de- Wise v. State, 394 S.W.3d 594, 598 (Tex. App.--Dallas fendant is on notice that State is seeking greater penalty 2012, no pet.
  • after the parties had closed, trial court entered plea of not true on behalf of defendant, and prior convictions to enhance punishment in notice of intent to enhance punishment were alleged for the first time in jury charge

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.