Skip to main content

Wiltz v. State

Citations

  • 827 S.W.2d 372
  • 1992 Tex. App. LEXIS 233
  • 1992 WL 12625

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding error in sustaining objection to defense counsel’s argument harmless when counsel had already made argument to jury and trial court did not instruct jury to disregard
  • holding error in sustaining objection to defense counsel’s argument harmless when counsel had already made argument to jury and trial court did not instruct jury to disregard
  • holding error in sustaining objection to defense counsel = s argument harmless when counsel had already made argument to jury and trial court did not instruct jury to disregard
  • trial court’s error by sustaining objection to defendant’s closing argument was harmless where trial court did not instruct the jury to disregard the argument
  • under harm standard akin to that of Rule of Appellate Procedure 44.2(a), holding that error in sustaining State’s objection to closing argument was harmless because trial court did not instruct jury to disregard argument

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bass, Dunn, Hughes

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

13 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

10 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.