McReynolds v. Gangel-Jacob

How later courts describe this case

• holding that defendant must object and obtain adverse ruling before he can complain on appeal about an erroneous jury argument
• holding that a defendant's failure to object to jury argument forfeits his right to complain on appeal
• conducting a harm analysis after determining that the trial court did not commit error
• requiring substantial compliance with Article 38.22 of the Code of Criminal Procedure
• juror testified that officer's unauthorized communication did not affect her ability to decide the case
• to preserve appellate complaint about jury argument, party must pursue objection to an adverse ruling
• defendant's failure to object to jury argument or failure to pursue to an adverse ruling his objection forfeits right to complain about argument on appeal
• party must procure an adverse ruling to preserve error