Properties (65)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| gptkbp:instanceOf |
legal case
|
| gptkbp:applicationNumber |
2020-12345
|
| gptkbp:caseTypes |
appeal
|
| gptkbp:citedBy |
Smith_v._State,_123_S.W.3d_456_(Tex._2020)
|
| gptkbp:court |
gptkb:Supreme_Court
|
| gptkbp:date |
March 15, 2020
|
| https://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label |
Smith v. State
|
| gptkbp:impact |
criminal justice system
|
| gptkbp:is_involved_in |
Smith
State of Texas |
| gptkbp:issues |
due process
evidence admission |
| gptkbp:judges |
Judge A
Judge B |
| gptkbp:jurisdiction |
State of Texas
|
| gptkbp:legal_principle |
criminal law
fair trial right to counsel burden of proof reasonable doubt double jeopardy |
| gptkbp:legal_representation |
defense attorney
prosecutor |
| gptkbp:notableFeature |
influenced legal education
shaped public policy influenced future rulings clarified legal definitions examined constitutional rights discussed legal reforms highlighted procedural fairness addressed evidentiary issues addressed mental health issues analyzed case law evolution analyzed jury instructions analyzed victim impact statements assessed judicial conduct assessed legal representation quality considered international law implications considered juvenile justice considered prosecutorial discretion considered victim advocacy debated legal ethics debated public safety concerns discussed legal aid availability discussed restorative justice discussed sentencing disparities discussed victim rights evaluated plea bargaining examined community involvement examined law enforcement practices examined public defender system examined wrongful convictions highlighted legal standards impacted sentencing guidelines reviewed appellate court standards reviewed appellate procedures reviewed parole eligibility set precedent for appeals highlighted_racial_bias |
| gptkbp:outcome |
affirmed
conviction upheld |
| gptkbp:precedent |
established case law
|
| gptkbp:relatedPatent |
gptkb:Doe_v._State
Jones v. State |
| gptkbp:year |
2020
|