Villarreal, Rene Daniel

How courts have described this case

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

• providing that an appellate court must “properly consider the plausibility of the evidence raising the defense”
• weighing state of the evidence against egregious harm when defendant’s statements “were internally inconsistent with his claim of self-defense and were contradicted by the entirety of the record”
• including arguments of counsel as a factor for consideration in egregious harm analysis
• stressing the extraordinary harm necessary to support a finding of egregious harm
• agreeing with court of appeals’s conclusion that the entire charge weighed in favor of egregious harm because “[n]othing in the charge alerted the jury that it must presume [appellant] had a reasonable belief that the use of deadly force was necessary”
• mere existence of conflict in evidence didn’t support conclusion that defendant suffered egregious harm; evidence favoring defendant’s position was weak and thus absence of instruction likely didn’t alter verdict

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).