Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): id. We hold that Graves fails to show he received ineffective assistance of counsel. Conclusion We affirm the judgment of the trial court. 1 . T.N. testified that they bought the camera "around October of 2000,” but he was not sure of the exact day. During an earlier videotaped interview, however, he could not remember the month or year. 2 . The Jensen court held that the error was harmless because the child’s live testimony did not differ substantially from the facts revealed in the videotape. Jensen v. State, 66 S.W.3d at 535-36 (noting the well-established rule that "the improper admission of evidence does not constitute reversible error if other properly admitted evidence proves the same facts”); see also Matz v. State, 21 S.W.3d 911, 912-13 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2000, pet. ref’d) (<HOLDING>). 3 . Dowthitt was a capital murder case, not a 
 Holding statements: (A) holding improperly admitted evidence may be harmless if cumulative (B) holding improperly admitted testimony was cumulative to the other properly admitted evidence and was therefore harmless (C) holding error in admission of evidence is harmless when it was merely cumulative to other evidence in the record (D) holding that error in admission of videotape was harmless because it was cumulative of childs properly admitted live testimony (E) holding that when evidence was erroneously admitted such error was harmless when the evidence was insignificant and cumulative
Output (English): holding that when evidence was erroneously admitted such error was harmless when the evidence was insignificant and cumulative