Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

417 S.W.2d 170

Harden v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1967-05-03

Relies on McDonald v. State · 171 Tex. Crim. 140 - Selvidge v. State · Ex Parte Seffens

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1967-05-03

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently July 2018

12 state decisions

40196719701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1OPINION

MORRISON, Judge

¶2(dissenting in part).

¶3I must, to be consistent with what I have said in the past, dissent to that portion of my Brother Onion’s opinion in which he considers the picture which has never been filed or introduced in evidence in the trial court. Reference is made to the following cases: Selvidge v. State, 171 Tex.Cr.R. 140, 345 S.W.2d 523; Cunningham v. State, 172 Tex.Cr.R. 3, 353 S.W.2d 37; Hill v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 375 S.W.2d 306; Ex parte Seffens, Tex.Cr.App., 376 S.W.2d 348; Luna v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 387 S.W. 2d 660; McDonald v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 385 S.W.2d 253; and Culbert v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 415 S.W.2d 646.

¶4White v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 410 S.W.2d 440, can have no application to the case at bar, as it is limited only to those questions of constitutional dimensions.

¶5I respectfully dissent to the above portion of the opinion.

/417/sw2d/170 · .json · Public domain