Skip to main content

Walter v. State

Citations

  • 267 S.W.3d 883
  • 2008 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1182
  • 2008 WL 4414536

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that “the trial court abused its discretion in admitting [declarant]’s narrative in toto without examining each fact asserted in the narrative to assess whether that fact was directly self-incriminating”
  • explaining generally “the hearsay rule excludes any out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted,” but exception to hearsay rule allows admissions of statements made against declarant’s interest
  • explaining difference between admissible blame-sharing statements and inadmissible blame-shifting statements and holding that “‘blame-shifting’ statements that did not inculpate the speaker and the defendant equally were inadmissible under the [hearsay] rule”
  • explaining rationale for admitting statements under recognized exceptions to hearsay rule
  • “the trial court must determine whether the statement, considering all the circumstances, subjects the declarant to criminal liability”
  • “only those statements that are directly against the speaker’s penal interest (including ‘blame-sharing’ statements) are admissible under Rule 803(24).”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

47 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.