Skip to main content

McFatridge v. State

Citations

  • 309 S.W.3d 1
  • 2010 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 4
  • 2010 WL 290445

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that the trial court could have rationally found that the appellant had sufficient assets to devote to the costs of her appeal.
  • noting that indigency determinations are made on case-by-case basis when issue is raised and that “[a] defendant can be found indigent for one purpose without being found indigent for the other”
  • providing that after a defendant establishes a prima facie showing of indigency, an appellate court can uphold the trial court’s determination of non-indigence only if the record contains evidence supporting that determination
  • observing that “unless there is some basis in the record to find the defendant’s prima facie showing to be inaccurate or untrue, the trial court should accept it as sufficient to find him indigent”
  • reiterating the appellate review process for an indigence determination and requiring “the trial court’s determinations [to be] reasonably supported by the evidence”
  • outlining two-step process for determining whether a person is indigent for purposes of appointed counsel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named McFatridge v. State

3 other CourtListener records share this case 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.