Hacker, Anthony Wayne (2013)
green
· 1,081 citation events
across 11 courts.
Showing the 50 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 2013 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
201320192026
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
green
Elvis MacK v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 873 (Tex. Crim.
green
Joseph Haskins v. State (2019)
Bell, 554 S.W.3d at 746 (citing Rickels, 202 S.W.3d at 763 ); Duncan v. State, 321 S.W.3d 53 , 56–57 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2010, pet. ref’d); see Hacker, 389 S.W.3d at 865 (“For probation-revocation cases, we have described the appellate standard of review as whether the trial court abused its discretion.”).
“For probation-revocation cases, we have described the appellate standard of review as whether the trial court abused its discretion.”
green
Christun Gibson v. State (2014)
See Hacker, 389 S.W.3d at 868 (“Given the deferential nature of a sufficiency review, we accept the trial court's decision to believe the probation officer's description of appellant's statements to her rather than the testimony of appellant and his wife.”).
“Given the deferential nature of a sufficiency review, we accept the trial court's decision to believe the probation officer's description of appellant's statements to her rather than the testimony of appellant and his wife.”
green
Rodney Wayne Gray v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Melanie Kae Holland v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Celia Nicole Camacho v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Alex Rodriguez v. the State of Texas (2026)
When making its determination, a trial court may make reasonable inferences from the evidence, see id. at 764, and “is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony,” Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Enrique Akil Diaz v. the State of Texas (2025)
App. 2016) (“When the record supports conflicting inferences, we presume that the jury resolved the conflicts in favor of the verdict, and we defer to that determination.”); Hacker, 389 S.W.3d at 865 (“[T]he trial judge is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony.”).
“[T]he trial judge is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony.”
green
Tommy Garrett v. the State of Texas (2025)
App. 2010) Caballero v. State¸706 S.W. 3d 562 18 (Tex. App. – Austin 2024) Hacker v. State, 389 S.W. 3d 860 19 (Tex. Crim.
green
Celeste Marie Salinas v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Shannon Dale Woodard v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
William Trent Whitman v. the State of Texas (2025)
A receipt indicating that Appellant had made a payment of $300 to the food bank on July 6 after the motion for revocation had been filed, in lieu of performing community service, was admitted into evidence. 2 Standard of Review and Applicable Law An order revoking community supervision must be supported by a preponderance of the evidence, meaning the “greater weight of the credible evidence which would create a reasonable belief that the defendant has violated a condition of…
quoting Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759, 764 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)
green
Sebastian Alexander Zapata v. the State of Texas (2024)
Accordingly, “to prevail on appeal, the defendant must successfully 9 challenge all of the findings that support the revocation order.” Silber v. State, 371 S.W.3d 605, 611 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2012, no pet.). “[T]he trial judge is the sole judge of the credibility of the witnesses and the weight to be given to their testimony.” Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
citing Davila v. State, 547 S.W.2d 606, 609 (Tex. Crim. App. 1977)
green
Jorge Luis Rico Jr. v. the State of Texas (2024)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Marcos Enrique Urdaneta v. the State of Texas (2024)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Julio Gutierrez v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Durrell Ware v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Aaron Ray Morris v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Sammy R. Bonner, Jr v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Roy Cletdell Robinson v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Eddie Marie Heard v. the State of Texas (2026)
“In the probation-revocation context, ‘a preponderance of the evidence’ means ‘that greater weight of the credible evidence which would create a reasonable belief that the defendant has violated a condition of his probation.’” Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
quoting Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759 , 763–64 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)
green
MacKenzie Logan George v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Joseph Michael Richey v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Keenan Deandre Black v. the State of Texas (2026)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Robert Taylor Krieg v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Maxx Austin Burrows v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Gere Jay Minnick v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
STANDARD OF REVIEW AND APPLICABLE LAW “We review a trial court’s order revoking community supervision for an abuse of discretion.” Carreon v. State, 548 S.W.3d 71, 77 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2018, no pet.) (citing Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Terrence Monstres Dancer v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Jimmy Wayne Skinner v. the State of Texas (2025)
App. 2015) (quoting Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 873 (Tex. Crim.
green
Brandon Michael Stockwell v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Lavell Edward Gray v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Damon Gomez v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Jarad Monroe Falls v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Julian Martinez v. the State of Texas (2025)
“For probation-revocation cases, we have described the appellate standard of review as whether the trial court abused its discretion.” Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Maxx Austin Burrows v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Lesley Paul Griffin III v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Robert Harper v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Lee Andrew Benson v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Robert Argarther Hoard v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Jordy H. Suljanovic v. the State of Texas (2025)
Motive “is a significant circumstance indicating guilt.” Id.; Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 870 (Tex. Crim.
“[P]roof of motive might be the glue that holds the entire case together.”
green
James Alan Miller v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 864-65 (Tex. Crim.
green
Romeo Alberto Ibanez-Barrera v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 873 (Tex. Crim.
green
Ehvan Reyna v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Staar Monique Dominguez v. the State of Texas (2025)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
citing Rickels v. State, 202 S.W.3d 759, 763 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006)
green
Jesus Dolores Silva, Jr. v. the State of Texas (2024)
Conway, 2024 Tex. App. LEXIS 5616 , at *3 (citing Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Jeffrey Aaron Brinson v. the State of Texas (2024)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Kirk DeWayne McClain v. the State of Texas (2024)
Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 865 (Tex. Crim.
green
Frederick Joseph Tallman Jr. v. the State of Texas (2023)
Finally, appellant contends that while he claimed responsibility for all of the contraband found in his truck, the Court still must apply the corpus delicti rule “stating that a defendant cannot be convicted solely based on his own admission.” See, e.g., Hacker v. State, 389 S.W.3d 860, 866 (Tex. Crim.
“The corpus delicti doctrine requires that evidence independent of a defendant’s extrajudicial confession show that the “essential nature” of the charged crime was committed by someone.”
green
Monica Galvan v. State (2015)
App. 2004); see also Hacker v. State, 389 SW3d 860, 871 (Tex. Crim.
“The destruction, suppression or fabrication of evidence undoubtedly gives rise to a presumption of guilt to be dealt with by the jury.”