James Paul Collier, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court's judgment, holding that the trial court did not err in refusing the voir dire parole question, did not err in its competency determinations, properly allowed the appellant to proceed pro se, and correctly did not address the Fifth Amendment claim because no objection was made. The majority relied on Texas precedent and federal standards for waiver of counsel. Justice OVERSTREET dissented on the first issue, arguing that parole eligibility information is relevant to future dangerousness and should have been disclosed to the jury.