Villarreal v. Texas · ¶16

The Court of Appeals of Texas affirmed Villarreal's conviction, see 596 S. W. 3d 338 (2019), as did the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals (TCCA), see 707 S. W. 3d 138. The TCCA understood the challenged conferral order as an effort to “preserv[e] the truth-seeking function of trial” and thus construed the order as prohibiting Villarreal's lawyers from “managing” his “ongoing testimony.” Id., at 146. In the TCCA's view, the order was a permissible exercise of the trial court's discretion because it “only restricted discussions of [Villarreal's] ongoing testimony and nothing else.” Ibid. Although a defendant must be able to confer with counsel about the “effects” of his testimony, the TCCA reasoned, a trial court may prohibit more explicit discussion of the defendant's testimony itself. Id., at 145. The TCCA explained that a trial court may, for example, order defense counsel not to “coach…

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.