discussed Cited "see" Whittington v. State This principle is fully articulated in Brown v. State, 475 S.W.2d 938 (Tex.Crim.App.1971). "... the return'of a true bill by the grand jury satisfies the principal purpose and justification for such a preliminary hearing — that there is probable cause to believe the accused committed the crime charged.” 475 S.W.2d at 946 ; Bullard v. State, 533 S.W.2d 812, 816 (Tex.Crim.App.1976); McDonald v. State, 513 S.W.2d 44, 46 (Tex.Crim.App.1974); accord Tarpley v. Estelle, 703 F.2d 157 , reh’g denied 710 F.2d 837 (5th Cir.) cert. denied 464 U.S. 1002 , 104 S.Ct. 508 , 78 L.Ed.2d 697 (1983).

discussed Cited "see" Bauers v. Cornett Accord Wachsman v. Dallas, 704 F.2d 160, 169 (5th Cir.) (applying Texas law), reh. denied, 710 F.2d 837 , cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1012 , 104 S.Ct. 537 , 78 L.Ed.2d 717 (1983). 62 We think that for the reasons stated in Pollard, the Missouri statute applicable to Bauers' conduct should be read as limited to elections where political parties play a substantial enough role that the integrity of the civil service would be compromised absent restrictions on employee participation.

cited Cited "see" Bauers v. Cornett Accord Wachsman v. Dallas, 704 F.2d 160, 169 (5th Cir.) (applying Texas law), reh. denied, 710 F.2d 837 , cert. denied, 464 U.S. 1012 , 104 S.Ct. 537 , 78 L.Ed.2d 717 (1983).