Meraz v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that Texas civil standards of review apply in assessing factual sufficiency of the evidence of jury's verdict rejecting a defendant's affirmative defense of insanity or incompetency
• holding that Texas civil standards of review apply in assessing factual sufficiency of the evidence of jury's verdict rejecting a defendant's affirmative defense of insanity or incompetency
• holding that the proper standard for review of factual sufficiency challenges to negative finding on issue that defendant had to prove by preponderance of the evidence is not Jackson v. Virginia standard
• holding that the proper standard for review of factual sufficiency challenges to negative finding on issue that defendant had to prove by preponderance of the evidence is not Jackson v. Virginia3 standard
• holding that the proper standard for review of factual sufficiency challenges to negative finding on issue that defendant had to prove by preponderance of the evidence is not Jackson v. Virginia standard
• finding that a modified Jackson standard is not appropriate for reviewing the legal or factual sufficiency of the evidence to reject an affirmative defense and adopting civil standards of review

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).