Skip to main content

Scott v. State

Citations

  • 227 S.W.3d 670
  • 2007 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 697
  • 2007 WL 1610493

How courts have described this case

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

  • explaining that the “question is the likelihood that the constitutional error was actually a contributing factor in the jury’s deliberations in arriving at th[e] verdict”
  • reasoning that the following factors are relevant to a harm analysis for constitutional error: “1
  • explaining that the A question is the likelihood that the constitutional error was actually a contributing factor in the jury = s deliberations in arriving at th[e] verdict @
  • noting that “how weighty the jury may have found the erroneously admitted evidence [should] be compared to the balance of the evidence with respect to the element or defensive issue to which it is relevant”
  • explaining harm analysis requires considering whether other evidence corroborated, contradicted, or was cumulative of improperly admitted evidence
  • reviewing court must be satisfied to level of confidence beyond a reasonable doubt, that error did not contribute to conviction to conclude that error was harmless

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

13 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Scott v. State

1,253 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.