EDIC v. State
EDIC v. State
351 S.W.3d 877; 2011 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1131; 2011 WL 3687889
(South Western Reporter, Third Series)
EDIC v. State
Opinion
dissenting.
I would grant Appellant’s petition for discretionary review and affirm the court of appeals. While I agree with the decision of the court of appeals, I do not feel that the issue raised by Appellant was fully addressed in the opinion. We have determined that a threat under the retaliation statute can be communicated to the person being threatened through a third party, however, we have never considered whether the complainant must have knowledge of the threat. Because this is an issue we should deliberate, I respectfully dissent to the Court’s decision to refuse Appellant’s petition for discretionary review.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.