Blasdell v. Texas (original by judge hervey)
Annotate this CaseAppellant was charged with aggravated robbery. The only dispute at trial was the identity of the assailant. To prove that the eyewitness misidentified Appellant, the defense called a forensic psychologist, Dr. Steven Rubenzer, to testify about the weapon-focus effect and its possible impact in this case. The trial court, however, excluded that testimony as irrelevant. Appellant was subsequently convicted. The issue this case presented for the Court of Criminal Appeals' review centered on whether the court of appeals erred when it affirmed the judgment of the trial court holding that Appellant failed to establish the reliability of proffered expert testimony. The testimony at issue was about the weapon-focus effect, which contended that the accuracy of an eyewitness identification could be detrimentally impacted when, during the commission of an offense, a weapon is used by the assailant and seen by the complainant. Finding no reversible error in the appellate court's judgment.
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.