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.
34 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1927–2024 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Schneckloth v. Bustamontegreen2 sentences2016Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 (1973); Meekins v. State, 340 S.W.3d 454, 458 (Tex. Crim. 2015See Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041, 2044 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973). | 7 | 17 |
Combest v. Stategreen2 sentences2008Combest v. State, 981 S.W.2d 958, 961 (Tex.App.–Austin 1998, pet. ref’d), citing Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973). 2008Combest v. State, 981 S.W.2d 958, 961 (Tex.App.–Austin 1998, pet. ref’d), citing Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973). | 4 | 6 |
Carmouche v. Stategreen2 sentences2009Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); Carmouche v. State, 10 S.W.3d 323, 331 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). 2009Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); Carmouche v. State, 10 S.W.3d 323, 331 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000). | 4 | 4 |
Roth v. Stategreen2 sentences1999Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 , 93 S.Ct. 2041 , 36 L.Ed.2d 854 (1973); Rath v. State, 917 S.W.2d 292, 299 (Tex.App.—Austin 1995, no pet.). 1998Schneckloth v. Bustamonte , 412 U.S. 218, 219 (1973) ; Roth v. State , 917 S.W.2d 292, 299 (Tex. App.--Austin 1995, no pet.). | 3 | 3 |
Reasor v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Consent to the search is an exception to the requirement for a warrant and requires that the State prove by clear and convincing evidence, based on a totality of the circumstances, that the defendant gave consent freely and voluntarily. (footnote: 3) Hunter , 102 S.W.3d at 310 (citing Reasor v. State , 12 S.W.3d 813, 818 (Tex. Crim. 2003Consent to the search is an exception to the requirement for a warrant and requires that the State prove by clear and convincing evidence, based on a totality of the circumstances, that the defendant gave consent freely and voluntarily. 3 Hunter, 102 S.W.3d at 310 (citing Reasor v. State, 12 S.W.3d 813, 818 (Tex.Crim.App.2000)). | 2 | 2 |
Valtierra v. Stategreen2 sentences2021Valtierra, 310 S.W.3d at 448 . 2019Valtierra v. State, 310 S.W.3d 442, 448 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2 |
Hollie v. Stategreen1 sentence2024See Hollies, 967 S.W.2d at 522 (“in a search for error of constitutional dimension, the fact that a trial court does not search out and publicly target, specifically or inferentially, specific members of the jury and by a supplemental Allen charge urge them to re-evaluate their views, is very important vis-à- vis coercion of a verdict” (emphasis in original)). | 1 | 1 |
Sanchez v. Stategreen1 sentence2022The question we must decide is whether the phone was illegally seized, not whether it was illegally searched, as the record shows the phone was searched after 37Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 806 (1984); Sanchez v. State, 365 S.W.3d 681, 686 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Segura v. United Statesgreen1 sentence2022The question we must decide is whether the phone was illegally seized, not whether it was illegally searched, as the record shows the phone was searched after 37Segura v. United States, 468 U.S. 796, 806 (1984); Sanchez v. State, 365 S.W.3d 681, 686 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Meekins v. Stategreen1 sentence2016Schneckloth v. Bustamonte, 412 U.S. 218, 219 (1973); Meekins v. State, 340 S.W.3d 454, 458 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Matthews, Cornelious L.green1 sentence2016See Matthews, 431 S.W.3d at 606-07 ; Ex parte Moore, 396 S.W.3d at 161; Davis v. State, 119 S.W.3d at 368 . | 1 | 1 |
Florida v. Jardinesgreen1 sentence2015See id. at 1415 . | 1 | 1 |
State v. Villarreal, Davidgreen1 sentence2015McNeely, 133 S.Ct. at 1558 (citations 2014 WL 6734178 at *10 (rejecting im- and internal quotation marks omitted). plied consent, exceptions to the warrant re- quirement—the automobile exception, the [5][6]To be constitutionally permissible, a war- special-needs exception, and the search- rantless search must fall within one of the well- incident-to-arrest-exception, as well as the accepted exceptions to the warrant requirement. treatment of the blood draw as a seizure, FN10 We have found no exception to the warrant not a search and employing a balancing requirement that would justify the sear | 1 | 1 |
Russell v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Russell v. SW2d (TeX.Cr.App. 1986); State 717 S.W.2d 7, 9 (Tex.Cr.App. v. State, 1986); Telshow v. 964 State 964 v. State, 2d 303, 307 (Tex.App. | 1 | 1 |
Carey v. Stategreen1 sentence2003See Carey v. State, 695 S.W.2d 306, 310 (Tex. App.–Amarillo 1985, no pet.) (holding that the detention was indistinguishable from an arrest when the officer Mirandized the suspect and placed him in the squad car without informing him that 5 Appellant does not argue that the Texas Constitution affords him any greater protection than the Federal Constitution and he does not se parately brief his claim that the search was in violation of article 38.23 of the Code o f Criminal Pro ced ure. | 1 | 1 |
Howard v. Stategreen1 sentence1998See Howard, 941 S.W.2d at 123 . | 1 | 1 |
Guadian v. Stategreen1 sentence1993Customs officers was justified where the “agents had reason to believe that the vehicle or person was carrying contraband.” Guadian v. State, 420 S.W.2d 949, 962 (Tex.Crim.App. 1967). | 1 | 1 |
Delgado v. Stategreen1 sentence1989See Delgado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 718 (Tex.Crim.App.1986); Scott v. State, 531 S.W.2d 825 (Tex.Crim.App.1976). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Hunter
green
2 sentences2003Consent to the search is an exception to the requirement for a warrant and requires that the State prove by clear and convincing evidence, based on a totality of the circumstances, that the defendant gave consent freely and voluntarily. (footnote: 3) Hunter , 102 S.W.3d at 310 (citing Reasor v. State , 12 S.W.3d 813, 818 (Tex. Crim. 2003Consent to the search is an exception to the requirement for a warrant and requires that the State prove by clear and convincing evidence, based on a totality of the circumstances, that the defendant gave consent freely and voluntarily. 3 Hunter, 102 S.W.3d at 310 (citing Reasor v. State, 12 S.W.3d 813, 818 (Tex.Crim.App.2000)). | 2 | 2003–2003 |
Davis v. State
green
1 sentence2016See Matthews, 431 S.W.3d at 606-07 ; Ex parte Moore, 396 S.W.3d at 161; Davis v. State, 119 S.W.3d at 368 . | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Scott v. State
green
1 sentence1989See Delgado v. State, 718 S.W.2d 718 (Tex.Crim.App.1986); Scott v. State, 531 S.W.2d 825 (Tex.Crim.App.1976). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Chambers v. Maroney
green
2 sentences1989Other Texas cases upholding a search have applied a principle stated in Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970), that for constitutional purposes, there is no difference between seizing and holding a car before presenting the probable cause issue to a magistrate and carrying out an immediate search without a warrant. 1989Other Texas cases upholding a search have applied a principle stated in Chambers v. Maroney, 399 U.S. 42 , 90 S.Ct. 1975 , 26 L.Ed.2d 419 (1970), that for constitutional purposes, there is no difference between seizing and holding a car before presenting the probable cause issue to a magistrate and carrying out an immediate search without a warrant. | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Aguilar v. Texas
red
2 sentences1985For purposes of this appeal, appellant contends that the State failed to show that the information provided by the confidential informer established probable cause for the search under the test of Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964). 1985For purposes of this appeal, appellant contends that the State failed to show that the information provided by the confidential informer established probable cause for the search under the test of Aguilar v. Texas, 378 U.S. 108 , 84 S.Ct. 1509 , 12 L.Ed.2d 723 (1964). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
New York v. Belton
red
2 sentences1982I, § 9. 1 We reject the State’s contention to the contrary. *789 The State invites our attention to the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981). 1982I, § 9. 1 We reject the State’s contention to the contrary. *789 The State invites our attention to the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States in New York v. Belton, 453 U.S. 454 , 101 S.Ct. 2860 , 69 L.Ed.2d 768 (1981). | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Battle v. State
green
1 sentence1927The knowledge in the possession of Ramsey, obtained from the witness Fry, going to show that there was a still in the car covered with bedding, etc., together with the declaration of the appellant near the time of his arrest that the car contained a still, would have justified the search under the rule of “probable cause” as defined in Odenthal v. State, 290 S. W. 743 ; Battle v. State, 290 S. W. 762 . | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Odenthal v. State
green
1 sentence1927The knowledge in the possession of Ramsey, obtained from the witness Fry, going to show that there was a still in the car covered with bedding, etc., together with the declaration of the appellant near the time of his arrest that the car contained a still, would have justified the search under the rule of “probable cause” as defined in Odenthal v. State, 290 S. W. 743 ; Battle v. State, 290 S. W. 762 . | 1 | 1927–1927 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.