No. 19-7827

Terry O'Nell Hall v. Texas

Lower Court: Texas
Docketed: 2020-03-02
Status: Denied
Type: IFP
IFP
Tags: co-defendant confrontation-clause criminal-trial cruel-and-unusual-punishment due-process evidentiary-inconsistency fundamental-fairness inconsistent-testimony right-to-fair-trial sentencing-disparity victim-testimony witness-testimony
Latest Conference: 2020-05-01
Question Presented (from Petition)

DID THE COURT OF APPEALS ERR IN DECIDE PETITIONER'S RIGHT TD DUE P WAS NOT VIOLATED, WHERE THE VICTIM TESTIFIED ONE WAY DURING HIS TRIAL AND THEN TESTIFIED A DIFFERENT WAY DURING THE TRIAL OF A GCH3EFENDANT? i.e. , Testified that a gun was used, during Petitioner's trial, but then testified that he didn't remember seeing a gun, during the trial of the co-defendant.

DID THE COURT OF APPEALS ERR IN DECIDING PETITINER'S RIGHT TO FUNDAMENTAL FAIRNESS AGAINST CRUEL AND UNUSUAL PUNISHMENT WAS NOT VIOLATED, WHERE THE VICTIM'S TESTIMONY ABOUT THE USE OF A GUN WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT AT HIS PUNISHMENT HEARING THAN IT WAS AT THE CO-DEFENDANT'S TRIAL, AND THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VICTIM'S TESTIMONY RESULTED IN A DISPARITY IN PUNISHMENT FOR TWO DEFENDANTS CONVICTED OF THE S&ME CRIME?

Question Presented (AI Summary)

Did the court of appeals err in deciding petitioner's right to due process was not violated, where the victim testified one way during his trial and then testified a different way during the trial of a co-defendant?

Docket Entries

2020-05-04
Petition DENIED.
2020-04-16
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/1/2020.
2018-03-10
Petition for a writ of certiorari and motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis filed. (Response due April 1, 2020)

Attorneys

Terry O'Nell Hall
Terry O'Nell Hall — Petitioner