informer claim (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

informer claim in Texas

5 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1965–2000 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Texas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (13)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Stoltegreen
texapp · 1999 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2000–2000
1 sentence

2000See id. at 342 .

11
State v. Devinegreen
moctapp · 1977 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984In short, `Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.'" State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct. 1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.

11
Sherman v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1958 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984The Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim disassociation through ignorance.” Id., 356 U.S. at 375 , 78 S.Ct. at 822 , 2 L.Ed.2d at 852 (1958). (emphasis added).

1984The Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim disassociation through ignorance.” Id., 356 U.S. at 375 , 78 S.Ct. at 822 , 2 L.Ed.2d at 852 (1958). (emphasis added).

11
State v. Coopergreen
iowa · 1976 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.

11
United States v. David Post Andertongreen
ca5 · 1980 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11
United States v. Clark N. Fischelgreen
ca5 · 1982 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11
People v. Dollengreen
ill · 1972 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

11
United States v. Robert Sylvester Waddellgreen
ca5 · 1975 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11
United States v. Roberto Gomez-Rojas, and Michael Rece Sutherlingreen
ca5 · 1975 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11
State v. Talbotgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1975 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

11
Lynn v. Stategreen
oklacrimapp · 1973 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.

11
State v. Perezgreen
fladistctapp · 1983 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984In short, `Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.'" State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct. 1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.

11
State v. Ostrandgreen
iowa · 1974 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1984–1984
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (11)

CaseCitedYears
Bosley v. State green
texcrimapp · 1967
2 sentences

1971Washington v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 907 ; Hernandez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 435 S.W.2d 520 ; Bosley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 414 S.W.2d 468 .

1970There is no showing that the informer was unavailable or that appellant was prevented from calling him as a witness. 76 A.L.R.2d 291 ; 15 Proof of Facts 332; Bosley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 414 S.W.2d 468 .

21970–1971
United States v. Fred Mosley green
ca5 · 1974
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11984–1984
United States v. William R. Perl green
ca4 · 1978
2 sentences

1984The U.S. Supreme Court’s strongly worded directive concerning the Government’s responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

1984The U.S. Supreme Court's strongly worded directive concerning the Government's responsibility for the actions of its informants, holding that ignorance is no defense, and that the government is deemed to have constructive knowledge of such actions, has been cited by the Fifth Circuit in U.S. v. Fischel, 686 F.2d 1082, 1085 (5th Cir.1982); U.S. v. Anderton, 629 F.2d 1044, 1047 (5th Cir.1980); U.S. v. Waddell, 507 F.2d 1226, 1228 (5th Cir.1975); U.S. v. Gomez-Rojas, 507 F.2d 1213, 1218 (5th Cir. 1975); U.S. v. Mosley, 496 F.2d 1012 , 1016 n. 4 (5th Cir.1974), and by the Fourth Circuit in U.S. v.

11984–1984
Messelt v. State green
alacrimapp · 1977
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984In short, `Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.'" State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct. 1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.

11984–1984
State v. Tomlinson green
iowa · 1976
2 sentences

1984In short, ‘Government cannot make such use of an informer and then claim dissasociation through ignorance.’ ” State v. Talbot III, 135 N.J.Super. 500 , 343 A.2d 777, 782 (N.J.Super.Ct.1975), citing Sherman, supra. See also, State v. Perez, 438 So.2d 436, 439 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1983); State v. Devine, 554 S.W.2d 442, 447 (Mo.Ct.App.1977); Messelt v. State, 351 So.2d 630 (Ala.Crim.App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.Crim.App.1973); Peo

1984App.1977); State v. Cooper, 248 N.W.2d 908, 910 (Iowa 1976); State v. Tomlinson, 243 N.W.2d 551 (Iowa 1976); State v. Ostrand, 219 N.W.2d 509, 512 (Iowa 1974); Lynn v. State, 505 P.2d 1337, 1343 (Okla.

11984–1984
Washington v. State neutral
texcrimapp · 1970
1 sentence

1971Washington v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 907 ; Hernandez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 435 S.W.2d 520 ; Bosley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 414 S.W.2d 468 .

11971–1971
Hernandez v. State neutral
texcrimapp · 1968
1 sentence

1971Washington v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 456 S.W.2d 907 ; Hernandez v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 435 S.W.2d 520 ; Bosley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 414 S.W.2d 468 .

11971–1971
Thayer v. State neutral
texcrimapp · 1965
1 sentence

1965The rule in Artell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 372 S.W.2d 944 , and Thayer v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 236 , this day decided, is that since there was no showing that the informant took any material part in bringing about the offense or that he was present when the offense was committed and could have been a material witness as to whether or not *78 appellant committed the crime, any inquiry concerning him would not he permitted.

11965–1965
McCown v. State neutral
texcrimapp · 1960
2 sentences

1965It is the judgment of this Court that Pointer has not changed the informer rule formerly announced by this Court in Arredondo v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 110 , 324 S.W.2d 217 , and followed in McCown v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 142 , 338 S.W.2d 732 .

1965It is the judgment of this Court that Pointer has not changed the informer rule formerly announced by this Court in Arredondo v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 110 , 324 S.W.2d 217 , and followed in McCown v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 142 , 338 S.W.2d 732 .

11965–1965
Arredondo v. State green
texcrimapp · 1959
2 sentences

1965It is the judgment of this Court that Pointer has not changed the informer rule formerly announced by this Court in Arredondo v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 110 , 324 S.W.2d 217 , and followed in McCown v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 142 , 338 S.W.2d 732 .

1965It is the judgment of this Court that Pointer has not changed the informer rule formerly announced by this Court in Arredondo v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 110 , 324 S.W.2d 217 , and followed in McCown v. State, 170 Tex.Cr.R. 142 , 338 S.W.2d 732 .

11965–1965
Artell v. State green
texcrimapp · 1963
1 sentence

1965The rule in Artell v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 372 S.W.2d 944 , and Thayer v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 397 S.W.2d 236 , this day decided, is that since there was no showing that the informant took any material part in bringing about the offense or that he was present when the offense was committed and could have been a material witness as to whether or not *78 appellant committed the crime, any inquiry concerning him would not he permitted.

11965–1965

Where else courts name it

LA 21 (1977–2017) CA 9 (1959–1969) IL 7 (1967–2013) WI 7 (1982–2017) NJ 7 (1966–1993) TX 5 (1965–2000) AK 4 (1973–1985) NY 4 (1971–1987) CT 3 (1963–2011) MN 2 (1975–1977) HI 2 (1998–2003) FL 2 (1987–1991) CO 2 (1982–1995) MS 2 (1975–1999) MI 2 (1968–1969) MD 2 (1973–2014) ID 2 (1992–1994) TN 2 (2003–2009) AL 2 (1973–1978) PA 2 (1984–1995)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check