Cook v. State

In Cook v. State, 702 S.W.2d 597, 599 (Tex.Crim.App. 1984), the Court determined the following comments constituted reversible error: I told you first of all there are several defenses we usually heard. A., would be mistaken identity. They couldn't do that because everybody identified him. B., using the alibi. Someone else, because 'I was somewhere else. I've got my alibi, because I was playing poker with the guys.' It wasn't that. Again, because all of the evidence involved. C., consent. There was no affirmative consent shown as to what happened during the attack. Only innuendoes and suppositions about what may have happened. Cook, 702 S.W.2d at 598. Examining the comment from the jury's standpoint, the Cook Court stated, "when the word 'I' is used in reference to something the defendant might have testified to, but did not, it is illogical to think that the jury is not reminded of the defendant's failure to testify." Cook, 702 S.W.2d at 599.