This is a SAMPLE built from a fictional case ("State v. John Fixture") so you can see exactly what a real report looks like. Every name, number, and quote below is invented.
Sample report — State v. John Fixture
A real report opens with what the review found, in plain words. For this fictional case it would read: the record shows two things a lawyer would want to see, and one more to show them.
Snot Nose Legal is not a law firm. This is information about what is in a court record. It is not legal advice and is not a substitute for the advice of an attorney.
What the record shows
Each finding quotes the record, page and line.
Your loved one told his trial lawyer about a witness who could support his alibi — and the record shows the lawyer never contacted her. At trial, the State told the jury no one could back up his story. A lawyer would want to see this.
Reporter’s Record Vol. 4, p. 212: “Q: Did you ever attempt to contact Ms. Alvarez? A: I did not, no.”
For your lawyer (Part B)
The record shows trial counsel testifying that he made no attempt to contact the alibi witness (RR4:212) whom the defendant had identified before trial (RR2:88), and the State telling the jury in closing that “not one person came here to say he was elsewhere” (RR5:301). Category: assistance of counsel — investigation.
A lab worker testified that her notes were kept in the State’s working file and never given to the defense. The record does not show what was in those notes. A lawyer would want to see this.
Reporter’s Record Vol. 3, p. 145: “We kept those in our working file. They weren’t produced to anybody.”
For your lawyer (Part B)
The record shows the analyst testifying that her bench notes were kept in the State’s working file and were not produced (RR3:145). The notes themselves are not in this record, so what they contained is not known from it. Category: disclosure by the State.
Also in the record
The jury heard an expert compare a bite mark to your loved one. Since this trial, scientists have questioned this kind of comparison. Texas has a law about convictions built on science that has changed since the trial — a lawyer would want to see this.
Reporter’s Record Vol. 4, p. 233: “In my opinion the dentition is consistent with the defendant to a reasonable degree of certainty.”
For your lawyer (Part B)
The record shows bite-mark comparison testimony presented as identifying the defendant (RR4:233) and referred to twice in the State’s closing (RR5:298, 305). The standing of that field has changed since the trial. Category: changed science (the rule is Article 11.073).
Where the clock stands
A real report also shows the time-limit picture: the dates from the record and the dates you gave us, the rule each time limit follows, and the arithmetic from those dates — for a lawyer to verify.
And when we find nothing?
Some reviews end with no findings. That report says so plainly and shows what we checked. An honest "nothing found" is information too — we treat it with the same care, and the next step is the same: take it to a lawyer.
This is what $299 buys — for your loved one’s real record.
Start the free check