NCJ Number
80903
Journal
Baylor Law Review Volume: 33 Issue: 4 Dated: (Fall 1981) Pages: 749-764
Date Published
1981
Length
16 pages
Annotation
This article outlines the fundamental legal errors that arise in the portion of the jury charge that applies the law of the offense to the facts of the particular case, with attention to Texas judicial decisions.
Abstract
In 1979, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals noted that it 'reversed no small number of cases for fundamental errors in the court's charge to the jury.' A review of recent cases demonstrates that such errors repeatedly infect jury charges, thus requiring automatic reversal. Absent an objection to the court's charge or a specially requested charge, a judgment 'shall not be reversed unless the error appearing from the record was calculated to injure the rights of the defendant, or unless it appears from the record that the defendant has not had a fair and impartial trial.' Such error is regarded by the Court of Criminal Appeals as 'fundamental error.' In Cumbie v. State, the court clarified the meaning of fundamental error in the jury charge to consist of four types: (1) when the court's charge omits an essential allegation contained in the indictment that must be proved; (2) when the charge substitutes a theory of the offense completely different from that theory alleged in the indictment; (3) when the charge, in addition to authorizing conviction on a theory alleged in the indictment, authorizes conviction on one or more theories not alleged in the indictment; or (4) when authorizing conviction for conduct that is an offense, the charge also authorizes conviction for conduct that does not constitute an offense. Fundamental error also occurs when the trial court's charge completely omits application of the law to the facts of the case.