19 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1996–2026 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gigliobianco v. Stategreen2 sentences2026See Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641-42 . 2025Gigliobianco, 210 S.W.3d at 641-42 . | 5 | 6 |
Brother v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See Arizpe, 308 S.W.3d at 92 ; see also Brother, 166 S.W.3d at 258 . 2012See Arizpe, 308 S.W.3d at 92 ; see also Brother, 166 S.W.3d at 258 . | 3 | 3 |
Arizpe v. Stategreen2 sentences2012See Arizpe, 308 S.W.3d at 92 ; see also Brother, 166 S.W.3d at 258 . 2012See Arizpe, 308 S.W.3d at 92 ; see also Brother, 166 S.W.3d at 258 . | 3 | 3 |
Rey v. Stategreen2 sentences2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State's interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State's and defendant's interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref'd) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual's right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio 2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State’s interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State’s and defendant’s interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref’d) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual’s right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio | 3 | 3 |
Elmore v. Stategreen2 sentences2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State's interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State's and defendant's interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref'd) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual's right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio 2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State’s interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State’s and defendant’s interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref’d) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual’s right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio | 3 | 3 |
Ake v. Oklahomagreen2 sentences2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State's interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State's and defendant's interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref'd) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual's right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio 2002See , e.g. , Ake , 470 U.S. at 1094 , 105 S.Ct. at 1094 ; and Rey , 897 S.W.2d at 339 (State's interest in judicial economy outweighed by both State's and defendant's interest in accurate disposition of criminal trial); see also Elmore v. State , 968 S.W.2d 462, 465-66 (Tex.App.--Eastland 1998, pet. ref'd) (potential economic burden of appointing defense experts in DWI trials outweighed by individual's right to fair and accurate adjudication of criminal case.) Although both the first and second factors weigh in favor of defendant, it is the third factor which is given the greatest consideratio | 3 | 3 |
Clarke v. Stategreen2 sentences2003We have previously stated that "[w]hen the failure to assert the right [to speedy trial] is made so late and never heard until trial, it weakens all the other factors because they are so dependent upon the assertion." Clarke v. State , 928 S.W.2d 709, 718 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1996, pet. ref'd) (op. on reh'g); see Haney , 977 S.W.2d at 643 . 2003We have previously stated that “[w]hen the failure to assert the right [to speedy trial] is made so late and never heard until trial, it weakens all the other factors because they are so dependent upon the assertion.” Clarke v. State , 928 S.W.2d 709, 718 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, pet. ref’d) (op. on reh'g); see Haney , 977 S.W.2d at 643 . | 2 | 2 |
Haney v. Stategreen2 sentences2003We have previously stated that “[w]hen the failure to assert the right [to speedy trial] is made so late and never heard until trial, it weakens all the other factors because they are so dependent upon the assertion.” Clarke v. State , 928 S.W.2d 709, 718 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 1996, pet. ref’d) (op. on reh'g); see Haney , 977 S.W.2d at 643 . 2003We have previously stated that "[w]hen the failure to assert the right [to speedy trial] is made so late and never heard until trial, it weakens all the other factors because they are so dependent upon the assertion." Clarke v. State , 928 S.W.2d 709, 718 (Tex. App.--Fort Worth 1996, pet. ref'd) (op. on reh'g); see Haney , 977 S.W.2d at 643 . | 2 | 2 |
Wasson Interests, Ltd. v. City of Jacksonville, Texasgreen1 sentence2023See Wasson II, 559 S.W.3d at 152 . | 1 | 1 |
Rohrmoos Venture, Eric Langford, Dan Basso, and Tobin Grove v. Utsw DVA Healthcare, Llpgreen1 sentence2020See 578 S.W.3d at 501 . | 1 | 1 |
Sifuentes v. Stategreen1 sentence2018See id.; see also Sifuentes v. State, 494 S.W.3d 806, 817 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.) (concluding first factor “weighs heavily” in –43– favor of admissibility where extraneous evidence cast doubt on appellant’s claim that he lacked requisite intent or knowledge). | 1 | 1 |
Salazar v. Stategreen1 sentence2003See Salazar , 38 S.W.3d at 151 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Barley v. State
green
1 sentence2015Barley, 906 S.W.2d at 34-35 . 18 Regarding the first and second factors, Reliford had a good opportunity to view appellant during the criminal act and he focused a high level of attention on appellant at the time of murder. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
West Anderson Plaza v. Feyznia
green
1 sentence1996Feyznia, 876 S.W.2d at 533 . 4 The first and second factors have already been resolved above. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
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.