27 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
DeVaughn v. Stategreen2 sentences2004DeVaughn v. State, 749 S.W.2d 62, 67 (Tex.Crim.App.1988). 1999DeVaughn v. State, 749 S.W.2d 62, 67 (Tex.Crim.App. 1988); Smith v. State, 895 S.W.2d 449, 453 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1995, pet. ref d) The charging instrument itself must convey adequate notice from which the accused may prepare his defense. | 5 | 6 |
State v. Cartergreen2 sentences2025See State v. Carter, 810 S.W.2d 197, 199 (Tex. Crim. 1999State v. Carter, 810 S.W.2d 197, 199 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). | 5 | 5 |
State v. Barbernellgreen2 sentences2016State v. Barbernell, 257 S.W.3d 248, 250 (Tex.Crim.App.2008). 2014See State v. Barbernell, 257 S.W.3d 248, 250 (Tex. Crim. | 3 | 3 |
State v. Moffgreen2 sentences2018State v. Moff, 154 S.W.3d 599, 601 (Tex. 2004). 2014Moff, 154 S.W.3d at 601 ; see Tex.Code Crim. | 1 | 11 |
Flores, Antonio R.green1 sentence2025Finally, because the Flores court determined there was no harm, “the conclusion that there was a statutory violation was dictum.” Flores v. State, 563 S.W.3d 907, 908 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Curry v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Curry v. State, 30 S.W.3d 394, 398 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence1999DeVaughn v. State, 749 S.W.2d 62, 67 (Tex.Crim.App. 1988); Smith v. State, 895 S.W.2d 449, 453 (Tex.App.-Dallas 1995, pet. ref d) The charging instrument itself must convey adequate notice from which the accused may prepare his defense. | 1 | 1 |
Adams v. Stategreen2 sentences1988Adams v. State, 707 S.W.2d 900, 901 (Tex.Cr.App.1986), citing, Voelkel v. State, 501 S.W.2d 313 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). 1988Adams v. State, 707 S.W. 2d 900, 901 (Tex.Cr.App.1986), citing, Voelkel v. State, 501 S.W.2d 313 (Tex.Cr. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jessica Tata v. State
green
1 sentence2025“A charging instrument must be specific enough to convey adequate notice of the nature of the accusations so that the accused may prepare a defense.” Tata v. State, 446 S.W.3d 456 , 462–63 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2014, pet. ref’d) (citations omitted). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Voelkel v. State
green
2 sentences1988Adams v. State, 707 S.W.2d 900, 901 (Tex.Cr.App.1986), citing, Voelkel v. State, 501 S.W.2d 313 (Tex.Cr.App.1973). 1988Adams v. State, 707 S.W. 2d 900, 901 (Tex.Cr.App.1986), citing, Voelkel v. State, 501 S.W.2d 313 (Tex.Cr. | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.