This Note will outline the contours of Rule 44.2(b) by examining: (1) the reasons and motivations behind the adoption of the new rule; (2) the case law interpreting the new standard contrasted against the old rule; and (3) the potentialities inherent in the new rule for harm to the rights of the accused. Finally, this Note will illustrate why, in the interest of justice, the new rule should be discarded in favor of the old rule
Texas courts should embrace their duty to protect the constitution and forbid the legislature from p...
All in all, though, the new Rules of Appellate Procedure, effective Sept. 1, 1986, should be welcome...
The law of habeas corpus has changed again. This time it was the law of harmless error. Before Brech...
This Note will outline the contours of Rule 44.2(b) by examining: (1) the reasons and motivations be...
Since 1967, federal courts have conducted harmless error analysis to determine whether to uphold a p...
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 governs how a defendant must be counseled when pleading guilty...
This article examines the increasing role of the Chapman Rule and its effect on the harmless error d...
Texas is the first state to adopt standards of conduct for appellate advocates. This article examine...
Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-cal...
In Clewis v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals finally addressed the conflict regarding pro...
Recent state and federal decisions significantly influenced Texas criminal procedure at both the tri...
When article 14.03(a)(1) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure first appeared in Texas law, landma...
This Note advocates that federal courts review state criminal convictions in habeas corpus proceedin...
The first part of this essay examines the development of harmless error law and its application to c...
Garrett\u27s disturbing outcome is the most egregious in a series of decisions promulgated by the Te...
Texas courts should embrace their duty to protect the constitution and forbid the legislature from p...
All in all, though, the new Rules of Appellate Procedure, effective Sept. 1, 1986, should be welcome...
The law of habeas corpus has changed again. This time it was the law of harmless error. Before Brech...
This Note will outline the contours of Rule 44.2(b) by examining: (1) the reasons and motivations be...
Since 1967, federal courts have conducted harmless error analysis to determine whether to uphold a p...
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 governs how a defendant must be counseled when pleading guilty...
This article examines the increasing role of the Chapman Rule and its effect on the harmless error d...
Texas is the first state to adopt standards of conduct for appellate advocates. This article examine...
Sixty years ago, in Kotteakos v. United States, the Supreme Court ruled that a small class of so-cal...
In Clewis v. State, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals finally addressed the conflict regarding pro...
Recent state and federal decisions significantly influenced Texas criminal procedure at both the tri...
When article 14.03(a)(1) of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure first appeared in Texas law, landma...
This Note advocates that federal courts review state criminal convictions in habeas corpus proceedin...
The first part of this essay examines the development of harmless error law and its application to c...
Garrett\u27s disturbing outcome is the most egregious in a series of decisions promulgated by the Te...
Texas courts should embrace their duty to protect the constitution and forbid the legislature from p...
All in all, though, the new Rules of Appellate Procedure, effective Sept. 1, 1986, should be welcome...
The law of habeas corpus has changed again. This time it was the law of harmless error. Before Brech...