Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Hussam Allam v. State
Citation: Not availableDocket: 02-03-00311-CR
Court: Court of Appeals of Texas; May 6, 2004; Texas; State Appellate Court
Original Court Document: View Document
Hussam Allam appeals his conviction for the assault of his wife, Hale Amin, challenging the trial court's decision to allow an expert witness, Pam Dickinson-Norris, to testify about the victim's credibility. During the trial, the prosecutor asked Dickinson-Norris if she found Amin credible based on her interactions with her, to which Allam's counsel objected, claiming it invaded the jury's role and called for speculation. The court overruled the objection, and Dickinson-Norris stated she found Amin credible, emphasizing that her ability to assist victims ethically depended on their truthfulness. The appellate court noted that to preserve an error for appeal, objections must be made each time the disputed evidence is presented. Since Allam's counsel only objected to the initial question and did not object to subsequent statements regarding credibility, the appeal on this ground was deemed waived. As a result, the court affirmed the trial court's judgment. The decision was delivered by Chief Justice John Cayce, with the panel including Justices Gardner and McCoy, and is not to be published.