Skip to main content

Rankin v. State

Citations

  • 46 S.W.3d 899
  • 2001 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 43
  • 2001 WL 611533

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that “[a] claim regarding sufficiency of the evidence need not be preserved for review at the trial level and is not waived by the failure to do so”
  • explaining that legal sufficiency claim need not be preserved in trial court, but not reaching factual sufficiency issue because not presented to court of appeals
  • holding defendant not required to preserve argument that evidence is legally insufficient to support deadly weapon finding
  • noting that A > [a]n appellate court must always address challenges to the [legal] sufficiency of the evidence = @ (quoting McFarland v. State , 930 S.W.2d 99, 100 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (alterations in original)
  • noting that A > [a]n appellate court must always address challenges to the [legal] sufficiency of the evidence = @ (quoting McFarland v. State , 930 S.W.2d 99, 100 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996) (alterations in original)
  • explaining the defendant waived appellate review of a complaint that the evidence was factually insufficient to support a deadly weapon finding when no legal authority concerning the issue was presented to the court of appeals

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Meyers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

93 cases in this archive cite 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.