Opinion ID: 2778081
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Improper Extraneous Offense Evidence

Text: Cox also asserts that the trial court violated his due process rights by allowing evidence of third-party threats to be admitted into evidence. 5 Case: 13-20446 Document: 00512931212 Page: 6 Date Filed: 02/09/2015 No. 13-20446 Specifically, Cox claims that the trial court erred by allowing a witness to testify that Cox’s daughter threatened to shoot at the victim’s house. The trial court also allegedly erred by allowing another witness to testify that a man named “Black” threatened to kill the victim’s family should Cox be convicted. A determination of whether this evidence was properly admitted is unnecessary. “The erroneous admission of prejudicial evidence will justify habeas relief only if the admission was a crucial, highly significant factor in the defendant’s conviction.” Neal v. Cain, 141 F.3d 207, 214 (5th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted). A defendant must also show that an alleged error “had [a] substantial and injurious effect or influence in determining the jury’s verdict.” Brecht v. Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 638 (1993) (citation and quotations omitted). Cox has not shown that the testimony concerning the third-party threats was a crucial or highly significant factor in his conviction. He also has not shown that the testimony had a substantial or injurious effect on the jury’s verdict. Because Cox has failed to make this showing, his alleged due process violation is meritless.