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.
16 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1950–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Young v. Stategreen2 sentences2002However, the rule stated in Helms was modified in Young v. State , 8 S.W.3d 656 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000), to provide that a plea of guilty waives the right to assert error on appeal only when the judgment of guilt was rendered independent of, and not supported by, the error. 2002However, the rule stated in Helms was modified in Young v. State , 8 S.W.3d 656 (Tex.Crim.App. 2000), to provide that a plea of guilty waives the right to assert error on appeal only when the judgment of guilt was rendered independent of, and not supported by, the error. | 1 | 2 |
In Re the Commitment of Lowegreen1 sentence2024Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441 , 444–45 (1972); In re Commitment of Lowe, 151 S.W.3d 739, 745 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2004, pet. denied). | 1 | 1 |
HOT ROD HILL MOTOR PARK v. Triologreen2 sentences2023Triolo, 293 S.W.3d at 791 ; see New, 1999 WL 675448 , at *2–3. 2023See Triolo, 293 S.W.3d at 791 ; New, 1999 WL 675448 , at *2–3. | 1 | 1 |
Lujan v. Defenders of Wildlifegreen1 sentence2012But the majority goes much further, reasoning that even where section 552.104 would shield information from disclosure, a private party would never have the right to assert that exception, and further implying that no private party would have standing 4 Boeing’s witness, David Bouse, acknowledged that other components of the overhead rate include utilities, certain high-level management salaries, and some services. 5 E.g., general and administrative expenses, like funding for pension plans. 6 See, e.g., Stop the Ordinances Please v. City of New Braunfels, 306 S.W.3d 919, 925-26 (Tex. App.—Aust | 1 | 1 |
Hendee v. Dewhurstgreen1 sentence2012But the majority goes much further, reasoning that even where section 552.104 would shield information from disclosure, a private party would never have the right to assert that exception, and further implying that no private party would have standing 4 Boeing’s witness, David Bouse, acknowledged that other components of the overhead rate include utilities, certain high-level management salaries, and some services. 5 E.g., general and administrative expenses, like funding for pension plans. 6 See, e.g., Stop the Ordinances Please v. City of New Braunfels, 306 S.W.3d 919, 925-26 (Tex. App.—Aust | 1 | 1 |
Stop the Ordinances Please v. City of New Braunfelsgreen1 sentence2012But the majority goes much further, reasoning that even where section 552.104 would shield information from disclosure, a private party would never have the right to assert that exception, and further implying that no private party would have standing 4 Boeing’s witness, David Bouse, acknowledged that other components of the overhead rate include utilities, certain high-level management salaries, and some services. 5 E.g., general and administrative expenses, like funding for pension plans. 6 See, e.g., Stop the Ordinances Please v. City of New Braunfels, 306 S.W.3d 919, 925-26 (Tex. App.—Aust | 1 | 1 |
Rakas v. Illinoisgreen1 sentence2000See id. at 136-37 . | 1 | 1 |
Meyer v. Tunksgreen1 sentence1998See Denton, 897 S.W.2d at 760 ; Butler, 522 S.W.2d at 197-98 ; Meyer v. Tunks, 360 S.W.2d 518, 521-22 (Tex.1962). | 1 | 1 |
Texas Department of Public Safety Officers Ass'n v. Dentongreen1 sentence1998See Denton, 897 S.W.2d at 760 ; Butler, 522 S.W.2d at 197-98 ; Meyer v. Tunks, 360 S.W.2d 518, 521-22 (Tex.1962). | 1 | 1 |
Warford v. Beardgreen1 sentence1998See also Watford, 653 S.W.2d at 910, 912 (answering only a few deposition questions does not waive the right to assert the privilege as to other deposition questions). | 1 | 1 |
O’connor v. Ohiogreen2 sentences1997The view that a defendant’s failure to object to denial of the right against self-incrimination does not necessarily constitute a waiver of the right to assert such error on appeal was supported inferentially in O’Connor v. Ohio, 385 U.S. 92, 93 , 87 S.Ct. 252, 253-54 , 17 L.Ed.2d 189, 191 (1966) (holding state procedural rule requiring trial objections could not bar an appellant from asserting a violation of his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination), and expressly in Walker v. United States, 404 F.2d 900, 903 (5th Cir.1968) (holding objection unnecessary where violation of righ 1997The view that a defendant’s failure to object to denial of the right against self-incrimination does not necessarily constitute a waiver of the right to assert such error on appeal was supported inferentially in O’Connor v. Ohio, 385 U.S. 92, 93 , 87 S.Ct. 252, 253-54 , 17 L.Ed.2d 189, 191 (1966) (holding state procedural rule requiring trial objections could not bar an appellant from asserting a violation of his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination), and expressly in Walker v. United States, 404 F.2d 900, 903 (5th Cir.1968) (holding objection unnecessary where violation of righ | 1 | 1 |
Hubert Junior Walker v. United Statesgreen1 sentence1997The view that a defendant’s failure to object to denial of the right against self-incrimination does not necessarily constitute a waiver of the right to assert such error on appeal was supported inferentially in O’Connor v. Ohio, 385 U.S. 92, 93 , 87 S.Ct. 252, 253-54 , 17 L.Ed.2d 189, 191 (1966) (holding state procedural rule requiring trial objections could not bar an appellant from asserting a violation of his constitutional privilege against self-incrimination), and expressly in Walker v. United States, 404 F.2d 900, 903 (5th Cir.1968) (holding objection unnecessary where violation of righ | 1 | 1 |
Shenandoah Associates v. J & K Properties, Inc.green1 sentence1991See, e.g., Shenandoah Associates v. J & K Properties, Inc., 741 S.W.2d 470, 491 (Tex.App.— Dallas 1987, writ denied). | 1 | 1 |
James v. Janegreen2 sentences1989James v. Jane, 221 Va. 43 , 267 S.E.2d 108, 114 (1980). 1989James v. Jane, 221 Va. 43 , 267 S.E.2d 108, 114 (1980). | 1 | 1 |
Ferguson v. Stategreen1 sentence1981Therefore, due to appellant’s stipulation to the commission of the offense, the errors presented in his motion to suppress are not appealable under Art. 44.,02, supra. See Ferguson v. State, 571 S.W.2d 908, 909-10 (Tex.Cr.App.); cf. Isam v. State, supra at 444 (guilty plea alone, entered pursuant to a plea bargain, does not waive errors asserted in pre-trial motion to suppress). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Katin v. City of Lubbock
green
2 sentences2013Despite the court’s sweeping statement of the rule, it did not apply it in a sweeping manner, but merely asserted that the fact that Speer had not asserted the privilege in responding to requests for admission in “compliance with the law did not result in waiver of the right to assert the privilege as to other requested discovery.” Id. 2013Despite the court’s sweeping statement of the rule, it did not apply it in a sweeping manner, but merely asserted that the fact that Speer had not asserted the privilege in responding to requests for admission in “compliance with the law did not result in waiver of the right to assert the privilege as to other requested discovery.” Id. | 3 | 2013–2013 |
Kastigar v. United States
green
1 sentence2024Kastigar v. U.S., 406 U.S. 441 , 444–45 (1972); In re Commitment of Lowe, 151 S.W.3d 739, 745 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2004, pet. denied). | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Ex Parte Butler
green
1 sentence1998See Denton, 897 S.W.2d at 760 ; Butler, 522 S.W.2d at 197-98 ; Meyer v. Tunks, 360 S.W.2d 518, 521-22 (Tex.1962). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Rose v. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Supreme Judicial District
green
2 sentences1989Any successive application, motion, or other request for relief which would otherwise have been filed in the court of appeals shall be filed directly in this court.... 778 S.W.2d at 66-67 . 1989Any successive application, motion, or other request for relief which would otherwise have been filed in the court of appeals shall be filed directly in this court.... 778 S.W.2d at 66-67 . | 1 | 1989–1989 |
James v. Jane
green
2 sentences1989James v. Jane, 221 Va. 43 , 267 S.E.2d 108, 114 (1980). 1989James v. Jane, 221 Va. 43 , 267 S.E.2d 108, 114 (1980). | 1 | 1989–1989 |
Southport Co. v. Martin G. Carter
neutral
2 sentences1950In Southport Petroleum Co. v. Carter, 139 Tex. 661 , 165 S.W.2d 85 , the Commission of Appeals in an opinion adopted by the Supreme Court assumed that a defendant had the right to appeal from an order “dismissing” his plea of privilege after sustaining plaintiff’s exceptions thereto. 1950In Southport Petroleum Co. v. Carter, 139 Tex. 661 , 165 S.W.2d 85 , the Commission of Appeals in an opinion adopted by the Supreme Court assumed that a defendant had the right to appeal from an order “dismissing” his plea of privilege after sustaining plaintiff’s exceptions thereto. | 1 | 1950–1950 |
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.