Tovar v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that because charge given to jury properly placed burden on the State to prove defendant’s mens rea as required by relevant statutes and charge tracked language of relevant statutes, instructions adequately and fully protected defendant’s rights
• holding that because charge given to jury properly placed burden on the State to prove defendant’s mens rea as required by relevant statutes and charge tracked language of relevant statutes, instructions adequately and fully protected defendant’s rights
• explaining that because the language in the jury charge tracked the language of the relevant statutes, it adequately and fully protected the appellant's rights
• explaining that because the language in the jury charge tracked the language of the relevant statutes, it adequately and fully protected the appellant’s rights
• noting that offenses “requir[ing] evidence of lewd exhibition of genitals by [a] child” do “not criminalize mere nudity of minors”
• explaining that because the language in the jury charge tracked the language of the relevant statutes, it adequately and fully protected the appellant’s rights

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).