Skip to main content

Thomas v. State

Citations

  • 444 S.W.3d 4
  • 2014 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1382
  • 2014 WL 5154586

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that where indictment alleged appellant failed to comply with specific sex offender registration requirement, jury could not find him guilty on alternative theory
  • holding that evidence a defendant was living at a new address as of a particular day was sufficient for a jury to have reasonably concluded that he intended to change addresses on that date
  • providing that jury may choose to believe or disbelieve any portion of the witnesses’ testimony
  • noting that a material variance renders a conviction “infirm” but that “[i]mmaterial variances do not affect the validity of a criminal conviction”
  • stating that in a sufficiency review, the court compares the elements of the crime as defined by the hypothetically correct jury charge—the law as authorized by the indictment—to the evidence adduced at trial
  • concluding, under nearly identical indictment, that evidence that Thomas was living at unregistered address on alleged move date was sufficient to support conclusion that he had intended to move by that date

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 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.