Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 9/23/1992

McFarland v. State

Citations

845 S.W.2d 824
1992 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 251
1992 WL 438312

How courts have described this case

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

holding that critical factor in Rule 803(2) analysis is whether declarant was still dominated by emotions, excitement, fear, or pain of event
holding that failure of counsel to object to admissible evidence did not satisfy the first prong of the Strickland analysis
holding that a defendant could not claim that his counsel was ineffective by taking a course of action that the defendant specifically requested
holding that no reversible error existed when same argument is presented elsewhere in trial without objection
holding that no reversible error exists when same evidence is presented elsewhere during trial without objection
holding that statement must be product of a startling event

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Campbell, Overstreet, Benavides, Clinton, Baird

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

46 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.