Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type
Extended Search
Generic filters
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Search in excerpt
Search in comments
Filter by Custom Post Type

Ex parte Smith (2010) – Case Brief Summary (Texas)

In Ex parte Smith, 309 S.W.3d 53, 63 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010), the Court found that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the testimony of Boone, the defendant's accomplice. Id. at 438.

The Court also discussed the jury charge in that case; specifically, we addressed Smith's issue claiming that the charge was erroneous because it asked the jury whether or not Boone was an accomplice as a matter of fact. Id. at 420.

The Court concluded that, because the record clearly demonstrated that Boone was charged with murdering the same individual that Smith was charged with murdering, Boone was an accomplice as a matter of law. Id. at 423.

Therefore, it was error to ask the jury whether he was an accomplice as a matter of fact. Id.