context: In short, Burd's defensive theory was the only issue in the case and the evidence relating to it was hotly disputed in each detail. This leads us to conclude that the second Almanza factor likewise weighs in favor of finding egregious harm.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 393 S.W.3d 867, 876
citation_a.parenthetical: concluding that state of evidence also weighed in favor of finding egregious harm where primary contested issue at trial was whether Villarreal acted in self-defense and conflicting evidence was presented regarding circumstances surrounding the stabbing
citation_a.sentence: See Al-manza, 686 S.W.2d at 172 (describing fundamental errors as those which “vitally affect [a] defensive theory”); see also Villarreal, 393 S.W.3d 867, 876 (concluding that state of evidence also weighed in favor of finding egregious harm where primary contested issue at trial was whether Villarreal acted in self-defense and conflicting evidence was presented regarding circumstances surrounding the stabbing).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 686 S.W.2d 172, 172
citation_b.parenthetical: describing fundamental errors as those which "vitally affect [a] defensive theory"
citation_b.sentence: See Al-manza, 686 S.W.2d at 172 (describing fundamental errors as those which “vitally affect [a] defensive theory”); see also Villarreal, 393 S.W.3d 867, 876 (concluding that state of evidence also weighed in favor of finding egregious harm where primary contested issue at trial was whether Villarreal acted in self-defense and conflicting evidence was presented regarding circumstances surrounding the stabbing).