Bingham v. State

Texas Court of Criminal Appeals · Decided 1995-11-15

Cited by 131 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

OPINION ON STATE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW CLINTON, Judge. On original submission in this cause, a plurality of the Court held that the court of appeals did not err to interpret Article 38.14, V.A.C.C.P. to require corroboration of a hearsay statement of a non-testifying accomplice to the offense before that statement can be considered by the jury in it…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.