Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1982–1998 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Roberts v. Stategreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Roberts v. State , 784 S.W.2d 430, 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); Drew , 743 S.W.2d at 224-25 ; Belton , 900 S.W.2d at 902 ; State ex. rel. 1998See, e.g., Roberts v. State , 784 S.W.2d 430, 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); Drew , 743 S.W.2d at 224-25 ; Belton , 900 S.W.2d at 902 ; State ex. rel. | 2 | 2 |
Belton v. Stategreen2 sentences1998See, e.g., Roberts v. State , 784 S.W.2d 430, 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); Drew , 743 S.W.2d at 224-25 ; Belton , 900 S.W.2d at 902 ; State ex. rel. 1998See, e.g., Roberts v. State , 784 S.W.2d 430, 435 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); Drew , 743 S.W.2d at 224-25 ; Belton , 900 S.W.2d at 902 ; State ex. rel. | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Bindergreen2 sentences1990See Ex parte Binder, 660 S.W.2d 103 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). 1990See Ex parte Binder, 660 S.W.2d 103 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). | 1 | 1 |
Drew v. Stategreen2 sentences1990In Drew v. State, 743 S.W.2d 207, at 224-25 (Tex.Cr.App.1987), for instance, the Court pointed out that at the time Whitmore was decided, trial courts retained jurisdiction of a cause until the appellate record was actually filed in this Court. 1990In Drew v. State, 743 S.W.2d 207, at 224-25 (Tex.Cr.App.1987), for instance, the Court pointed out that at the time Whitmore was decided, trial courts retained jurisdiction of a cause until the appellate record was actually filed in this Court. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Port v. State
green
2 sentences1993The Whitmore rule has been most recently described by the Austin court in Port, 798 S.W.2d 839 , as requiring that the defendant show good cause for any late filing of a motion for new trial at the trial court level. 1993The Whitmore rule has been most recently described by the Austin court in Port, 798 S.W.2d 839 , as requiring that the defendant show good cause for any late filing of a motion for new trial at the trial court level. | 2 | 1992–1993 |
State v. Mapp
green
2 sentences1990State v. Mapp, 764 S.W.2d 823 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1989). 1990State v. Mapp, 764 S.W.2d 823 (Tex.App.—Houston [14th] 1989). | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Whitmore v. State
green
2 sentences1982Whitmore v. State, 570 S.W.2d 889 (Tex.Cr.App.1978). 1982Whitmore v. State, 570 S.W.2d 889 (Tex.Cr.App.1978). | 1 | 1982–1982 |