Garza v. State, No. PD-0480 -10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published). Evidence held legally insufficient to support a theft conviction where the value of  the property taken (computer parts, stolen over a long time) was aggregated, but the evidence showed the special property owner, Dennis Leahy (an investigator for Hewlett Packard, the owner) had not worked for the company over the entire period of the thefts.  The Court notes that in this kind of case, the “better practice” would be for the State to allege a single entity, such as Hewlett Packard as the property owner.

Phillips v. State, No. PD-1402-09 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  Statute of limitations issues may be raised for the first time on appeal.

Young v. State, No. PD-1030-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  Where defendant is charged with Failure to Register, trial court properly instructed the jury in the disjunctive, so as to permit some jurors to find Defendant failed to register change of address 7 days before his move, and other jurors to find he failed to register within 7 days after his move, as long as all twelve found a failure to register.

Martinez v. State, No. PD-1238-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  Fourth Amendment violation found where defendant’s vehicle was stopped solely on the basis of an anonymous phone tip.

York  v. State, No. PD-088-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  The State is not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause from relitigating a suppression issue that was not an ultimate fact in the second prosecution.

                Ex Parte Robbins, No. AP-156-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  Evidence that an independent forensic examiner partially recanted her trial testimony as to the cause of death did not establish new evidence showing actual innocence, nor constituted evidence of false testimony.

Armstrong v. State, No. PD-1479-10 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  Defendant may challenge order requiring reimbursement of attorneys’ fees on legal sufficiency grounds on direct appeal of criminal conviction.

Sorrells v. State, No. PD-1802-09.  (Tex. Crim. App. 2011) (published).  The Court substitutes its own conclusion in place of that of the 13th Court of Appeals on a legal sufficiency issue.  Noteworthy, because the Court normally does not do that.

Limons v. State, No. PD-1320-10 (published).  Permission to search a residence may be given by a person with apparent authority, in this case a “mature” teenager who answered the door in the middle of the night.  (The Court notes that in some cases, entry after permission by a “child” may be unreasonable).