Jacobson v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this CaseA jury convicted appellant of aggravated sexual assault of a child. During the punishment phase, appellant testified and admitted that he had had an ongoing sexual relationship with the child. The court of appeals held that, under the "De Garmo" doctrine, appellant was estopped from complaining about the State's jury argument during the guilt phase because he had later admitted his guilt. Therefore, the court was precluded from addressing the merits of appellant's claim. The Supreme Court granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to decide whether "Leday's" exceptions to the De Garmo estoppel doctrine should "be extended to a broader class of guilty-phase errors." Upon review, the Court concluded that Leday's reasoning applied to all guilt-stage claims of error, not merely "fundamental" claims, and it overruled "any last vestiges" of the De Garmo doctrine. "Therefore, a defendant who testifies at the punishment stage of trial and admits his guilt does not forfeit his right to complain on appeal about errors occurring during the guilt stage." The Court remanded this case to the court of appeals to address the merits of appellant's complaint.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.