https://texasappeals.org/topics/court-of-criminal-appeals-of-texas/Clinical descriptions of the Texas appellate decisions drawing the most press coverage.Hugo -- gohugo.ioen-usMon, 16 Mar 2026 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2026/03/villarreal-v-texas/Mon, 16 Mar 2026 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2026/03/villarreal-v-texas/The Court held that a Texas trial judge did not violate the Sixth Amendment by instructing a testifying defendant’s lawyers, during a 24-hour overnight recess, not to manage his ongoing testimony while permitting all other discussion. Seven Justices formed the majority; Justice Thomas, joined by Justice Gorsuch, concurred in the judgment only.https://texasappeals.org/2026/02/ex-parte-mejia-actual-innocence/Mon, 09 Feb 2026 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2026/02/ex-parte-mejia-actual-innocence/In a brief per curiam opinion with no stated analysis, the court agreed that Mejia established actual innocence, set aside her three convictions, and remanded her to the custody of the Travis County sheriff to answer the indictment. Judge Finley, joined by Judge Parker, agreed she is entitled to relief but would have granted it under Article 11.073 rather than on actual-innocence grounds.https://texasappeals.org/2025/12/parker-v-state-capital-direct-appeal/Mon, 01 Dec 2025 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2025/12/parker-v-state-capital-direct-appeal/The court held that the evidence was sufficient for a rational juror to find that the infant removed from the victim’s body was “born and is alive” when the defendant kidnapped or attempted to kidnap her, and it overruled twenty-four other points of error on the merits or for lack of preservation or briefing. A concurrence addressed the Penal Code’s two definitions of “individual.”https://texasappeals.org/2025/10/ex-parte-speer-capital-habeas/Mon, 06 Oct 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/10/ex-parte-speer-capital-habeas/In a per curiam opinion, the court held that a Bowie County district court had no jurisdiction over a constitutional habeas application seeking to bar the Texas Department of Criminal Justice from using allegedly expired and fire-damaged pentobarbital in a scheduled execution, because such an injunction would function as a stay of execution that only the Court of Criminal Appeals may grant. The court did not reach the merits of the method-of-execution claims.https://texasappeals.org/2025/09/ex-parte-charette-rehearing/Mon, 08 Sep 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/09/ex-parte-charette-rehearing/On the State’s motion for rehearing, the court withdrew its September 2024 opinion and affirmed the denial of pretrial habeas relief to a former judicial candidate. It held that neither the Texas Constitution nor Government Code Chapter 571 categorically bars a criminal prosecution for election-law offenses brought without a referral from the Texas Ethics Commission or exhaustion of its civil process, while reaffirming that the habeas claim was cognizable.https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/holberg-v-lumpkin-capital-habeas/Mon, 10 Mar 2025 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2025/03/holberg-v-lumpkin-capital-habeas/A divided panel held that evidence the State did not disclose—that a jailhouse witness was a paid police informant—was favorable and material impeachment evidence under Brady v. Maryland, and that the state court’s contrary ruling was an unreasonable application of clearly established Supreme Court law. Judge Duncan dissented on materiality.https://texasappeals.org/2024/12/ex-parte-halprin-judicial-bias-new-trial/Mon, 02 Dec 2024 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2024/12/ex-parte-halprin-judicial-bias-new-trial/The court found by a preponderance of the evidence that the judge who presided over Halprin’s 2003 capital murder trial was actually biased against him because he is Jewish, held that actual judicial bias is structural error requiring no showing of harm, and remanded for a new trial. A second claim was dismissed as an abuse of the writ.https://texasappeals.org/2024/11/in-re-texas-house-roberson-subpoena/Mon, 25 Nov 2024 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2024/11/in-re-texas-house-roberson-subpoena/The court denied a Texas House committee’s petition, holding that the separation of powers does not permit judicial enforcement of a legislative subpoena that would require canceling a long-scheduled execution. The opinion states that the dispute has nothing to do with Robert Roberson’s guilt or innocence.https://texasappeals.org/2024/11/in-re-tdcj-ex-rel-paxton-roberson-subpoena/Mon, 11 Nov 2024 07:00:00 -0600https://texasappeals.org/2024/11/in-re-tdcj-ex-rel-paxton-roberson-subpoena/In a per curiam opinion, the court held that a district court’s temporary restraining order enjoining the Texas Department of Criminal Justice from carrying out a death warrant had the effect of staying a scheduled execution and was subject to the court’s mandamus authority. The court vacated the order itself. Four judges dissented.https://texasappeals.org/2024/07/ex-parte-cook-actual-innocence/Mon, 08 Jul 2024 07:00:00 -0500https://texasappeals.org/2024/07/ex-parte-cook-actual-innocence/The court held that newly discovered DNA evidence, combined with evidence of false testimony and State misconduct, established by clear and convincing evidence that no rational jury would convict Cook of the 1977 Tyler murder. It did not reach his remaining due-process claims, and the habeas court had recommended denying the actual-innocence claim.