Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 10/13/2004

Threadgill v. State

Citations

146 S.W.3d 654
2004 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1730
2004 WL 2303617

How courts have described this case

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

holding that the inconsistency of various capital-sentencing schemes is not the type of arbitrariness .condemned by Furman
holding that because defendant failed to object to jury argument, he forfeited right to raise issue on appeal
holding that defendant waived objection to prosecutor’s conduct in striking at defendant over the shoulders of his counsel during closing argument by failing to object
holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendant’s request to close arguments
providing that appellate courts apply TEX. R. APP. P. 44.2(b)’s non-constitutional harm analysis to improper jury argument
holding failure to object to an allegedly \manifestly improper\ jury argument forfeits the right to raise the issue on appeal, reaffirming Cockrell

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

29 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases named Threadgill v. State

14 other CourtListener records share this case 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.