Skip to main content

Ray v. State

Citations

  • 178 S.W.3d 833
  • 2005 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1965
  • 2005 WL 3058188

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding exclusion of corroborating witness did not unconstitutionally preclude defendant from showing she did not possess drugs when she testified to the same
  • concluding court of appeals did not err in declining to apply constitutional harm analysis when exclusion of evidence did not prevent appellant from presenting her defense
  • stating that evidentiary rulings rarely rise to the level of denying the fundamental constitutional rights to present a meaningful defense and explaining that evidence that “incrementally further[s] [a] defensive theory” is not of constitutional dimension
  • reversing and remanding for new trial after concluding trial court erred by excluding evidence favorable to defense
  • applying 44.2(b) standard for the exclusion of a fact witness when the defendant testified at trial to the same defensive theory the excluded witness would have supported
  • describing two circumstances in which improper exclusion of evidence may establish constitutional violation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

12 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.