Curtis Paul Harris, Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court granted the State’s motion for rehearing, affirmed the capital murder conviction, and held that the trial court did not err in allowing the jury to separate after the charge because the State, through the trial judge’s statements, rebutted the statutory presumption of harm. The Court also affirmed the trial court’s handling of the accomplice‑witness issue, the sufficiency of the evidence, the admissibility of extraneous‑offense testimony, the special‑issue finding of a continuing threat, and the jury‑empanelment procedures. The dissenting opinions contest the majority’s view on the jury‑separation error and the weight of the trial judge’s unsworn statements.