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.
23 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1979–2022 15 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bledsoe v. Stategreen2 sentences2022See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 , 827–28 (Tex. Crim. 2022See Bledsoe v. State, 178 S.W.3d 824 , 827–28 (Tex. Crim. | 16 | 16 |
In Re Kfgreen1 sentence2013See also In re K.F., 351 S.W.3d 108, 113-14 (Tex.App.--San Antonio 2011, no pet.) (quoting former version of statute and noting nothing in current version of Family Code requires rendition of a final order before dismissal date). 4 If, however, we have misconstrued the movants’ intention, and they simply have reached a settlement of the case and desire a disposition of the appeal not dependent on a finding of reversible error, the Court would entertain a joint motion for rehearing making that intention clear. | 1 | 1 |
Romero v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Romero, 800 S.W.2d at 543 ; Deleon, 126 S.W.3d at 214 n.3; see also Perez, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 5724 , at *16 n.13. | 1 | 1 |
Williams v. Stategreen1 sentence1990Williams v. State, 643 S.W.2d 136, 138 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1982). | 1 | 1 |
Jackson v. Stategreen1 sentence1986See Cavender v. State, 547 S.W.2d at 602 -03 and Jackson v. State, 363 S.W.2d 947, 947-48 (Tex.Crim.App.1963). | 1 | 1 |
Cavender v. Stategreen1 sentence1986See Cavender v. State, 547 S.W.2d at 602 -03 and Jackson v. State, 363 S.W.2d 947, 947-48 (Tex.Crim.App.1963). | 1 | 1 |
Parasco v. Statered2 sentences1986Each of those cases involved a finding of reversible error either because a reputation witness was basing his opinion concerning the other witnesses’ reputation for veracity on his own personal belief, rather than upon the other witnesses’ general reputation in the community, see Parasco v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 89 , 323 S.W.2d 257, 258-59 (1959), or because the prosecutor was asking a witness about extraneous offenses by the accused with little or no evidence of same. 1986Each of those cases involved a finding of reversible error either because a reputation witness was basing his opinion concerning the other witnesses’ reputation for veracity on his own personal belief, rather than upon the other witnesses’ general reputation in the community, see Parasco v. State, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 89 , 323 S.W.2d 257, 258-59 (1959), or because the prosecutor was asking a witness about extraneous offenses by the accused with little or no evidence of same. | 1 | 1 |
Gulf Paving Co. v. Lofstedtgreen2 sentences1984Civ.P. 372; Gulf Paving Co. v. Lofstedt, 144 Tex. 17 , 188 S.W.2d 155, 159 (1945); J. 1984Civ.P. 372; Gulf Paving Co. v. Lofstedt, 144 Tex. 17 , 188 S.W.2d 155, 159 (1945); J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Deleon v. State
green
1 sentence2012See Romero, 800 S.W.2d at 543 ; Deleon, 126 S.W.3d at 214 n.3; see also Perez, 2011 Tex. App. LEXIS 5724 , at *16 n.13. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Ridgell v. Ridgell
green
1 sentence2012A reviewing court should remand to the trial court for a re-division of the marital estate only upon a finding of reversible error that materially affects the “just and right” division of the community property or if the division of property is “manifestly unjust and unfair.” See id. | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Roberts v. State
green
1 sentence1979Although appellant did object to the admission of State’s Exhibit 2 because there was no notice of the State’s intent to introduce State’s Exhibit 2 in the pleadings, we conclude, as in Goolsby v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 312 S.W.2d 654 (on motion for rehearing) and Roberts v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 301 S.W.2d 154 , that the nature of the offense charged in the information puts a defendant on notice that documentary proof of an essential element would be used. 5 This fact, combined with the constructive notice provided and the total failure to plead or show unfair surprise from the absence of actual d | 1 | 1979–1979 |
Goolsby v. State
green
1 sentence1979Although appellant did object to the admission of State’s Exhibit 2 because there was no notice of the State’s intent to introduce State’s Exhibit 2 in the pleadings, we conclude, as in Goolsby v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 312 S.W.2d 654 (on motion for rehearing) and Roberts v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 301 S.W.2d 154 , that the nature of the offense charged in the information puts a defendant on notice that documentary proof of an essential element would be used. 5 This fact, combined with the constructive notice provided and the total failure to plead or show unfair surprise from the absence of actual d | 1 | 1979–1979 |
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.