Daniel Wayne Sadler, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court affirmed the Court of Appeals' judgment, holding that a prospective juror who indicates he would consider the facts of the crime in determining punishment is not challengeable for cause so long as the juror can consider the full range of punishment prescribed by law for the offense. The Court clarified that bias exists only when a juror cannot consider both the minimum and maximum penalties for the offense. Two concurring opinions agreed with the judgment but expressed differing views on the underlying rule, while a dissent was filed.