Skip to main content

Taylor v. State

Citations

  • 10 S.W.3d 673
  • 2000 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 9
  • 2000 WL 60019

How courts have described this case

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

  • recognizing that in Griffith, the Supreme Court “repudiated the Stovall doctrine of retroactivity and its underlying rationale”
  • recognizing that Griffith does not bind the states as to the retroactivity of new rules under state law and applying Stovall
  • holding that a Stovall analysis applies to new rules of non-constitutional origin
  • explaining that uncorroborated accomplice witness testimony can be legally sufficient under Jackson v. Virginia
  • distinguishing statutorily-imposed sufficiency review from sufficiency review derived from constitutional principles and explaining accomplice-witness testimony can be sufficient to sustain a conviction under the Jackson v. Virginia standard
  • distinguishing statutorily-imposed sufficiency review from sufficiency review derived from constitutional principles and explaining accomplice-witness testimony can be sufficient to sustain a conviction under the Jackson v. Virginia standard

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keller, McCormick, Meyers, Price, Holland, Womack, Johnson, Keasler, Mansfield

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

44 cases in this archive are cited by 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.