Whether testimony can be sufficient to render harmless any error in admitting additional testimony as evidence, when trial counsel objected to testimony and when the record suggests testimony was not properly admitted and violate due process and the confrontation clause under both the United States and Texas Constitution in addition to due course of law

No question identified. : Queston Dresented ae — Whether teshimony Can be sufBcrent +e render harm less any eror in admittng additrona| teshmony an evidence, When brral Counse obyectec +o testimony and when dhe record susgests teshmany Was nor properly admitted and Violate clue process ; the tonfrontabon clause under both the Unrled States and lexas Consttithon in addithun bo due couse of lew. “Wilber Jomnson TP RTETCC 12 “ann voto h+ One 2ooS Prison Ld vela yoily TSp}) 2. hespondients) on appeal fry the State. Chiat Moro Texas Gartlo. 2401144 Soo Selerson St. Ste WO Houston, T9002, Bim Ong = Disc? Bhomey oP Wamns Gunky Sapna Oswald aunt Eelcrd Bopelbavyt heated Cases istrict, Houston. Jedament entered ‘November 32022. ‘ohingon Vv PQ-0672-22., Cook of Orimina\ Appeals of Texas. Juodoment entered Februan, $,2023 Table of Mot horiHes arted | * Aeeord United States y. Orrico une +F7 ‘Allen velllmos tte 347 U.S. 337,333,40 $-C+. 1057, 75 L.Ed 2d 383 C1470) : Aiien u Qtate ot Louisiana Pane + 7 B66 So:2d 150% 13/2 CLa (479) 4oq_F2d 4s, 1404 v5.4 is $ 33 U.S.A . 0.Cércui Felorvany 11, 1464) ‘Coronado v.State, Page 351 5-W.3d 315,325 CTex-Crrm. App :2at) lo W.2d $2 ; USS Sod 1274, (241 CFla.1490) : “O'Mary v State, Pe HB (24 Tex Cnim. 244 134 $.lu.2ad Foo v ‘ Villalon vu. State Poe £6 1349 $.W.2d 450 a “Tex Rfpp 83.) Dorne He | ‘ Federal Constiuhon Art. 140 cli Paoe $5, b |