Daniel Hernandez v. State
This text of Daniel Hernandez v. State (Daniel Hernandez v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By two points of error, appellant contends his due process and due course of law rights were violated by personal attacks on defense counsel by the prosecutor during jury argument. When appellant first objected, the court admonished the jury to "take the evidence from the witness stand." Appellant's second objection was sustained and he asked for no further relief.
"[A] defendant's failure to object . . . or . . . failure to pursue to an adverse ruling his objection to a jury argument forfeits his right to complain about the argument on appeal." Cockrell v. State, 933 S.W.2d 73, 89 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). In Cockrell, the court expressly overruled Romo v. State, 631 S.W.2d 504, 505 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982), on which appellant relies to excuse his failure to obtain an adverse ruling. Under Cockrell, no error is presented.
The points of error are overruled and the judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Mack Kidd, Justice
Before Chief Justice Aboussie, Justices Kidd and Smith
Affirmed
Filed: April 13, 2000
Do Not Publish
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Daniel Hernandez v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/daniel-hernandez-v-state-texapp-2000.