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.
15 Texas opinions name it 3 courts 1984–2023 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Holloway v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend 2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend | 4 | 4 |
Patterson v. Illinoisgreen2 sentences2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend 2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend | 3 | 3 |
Upton v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend 2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend | 3 | 3 |
Moran v. Burbinegreen2 sentences2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend 2007See Patterson, 487 U.S. at 290 n. 3, 108 S.Ct. 2389 (“Once an accused has a lawyer, a distinct set of constitutional safeguards aimed at preserving the sanctity of the attorney-client relationship takes effect.”); Burbine, 475 U.S. at 428 , 106 S.Ct. 1135 (“[0]nce the [Sixth Amendment] right has attached, it follows that the police may not interfere with the efforts of a defendant’s attorney to act as a ‘ “medium” between [the suspect] and the State.’”); Holloway, 780 S.W.2d at 795 (“[W]e hold that where a relationship between the accused and his attorney has become applicable, the Sixth Amend | 2 | 3 |
Hollin v. Stategreen2 sentences2015See Hollin v. State, 227 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. ref’d) (because statutes were not in pari materia, trial court did not err in denying motion to quash indictment). 2015See Hollin v. State, 227 S.W.3d 117, 122 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, pet. ref’d) (because statutes were not in pari materia, trial court did not err in denying motion to quash indictment). | 2 | 2 |
Hudson v. Stategreen1 sentence2023On this record, we conclude that Holloway failed to preserve his issue challenging the State’s questioning of him.4 See Hudson v. State, 675 S.W.2d 507, 511 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 1 |
Schuchmann v. Schuchmanngreen1 sentence2020See Schuchmann, 193 S.W.3d at 603 . | 1 | 1 |
Garcia v. Peeplesgreen2 sentences2016See Garcia, 734 S.W.2d at 345 ; In re Toyota Motor Corp., 191 S.W.3d at 503 . 2016See Garcia, 734 S.W.2d at 345 ; In re Toyota Motor Corp., 191 S.W.3d at 503 . 2. | 1 | 1 |
Moore v. Kitsmillergreen1 sentence2009Moore v. Kitsm iller, 201 S.W.3d 147, 151 (Tex. App.–Tyler 2006, pet. denied). | 1 | 1 |
Morgan Stanley & Co. v. Texas Oil Co.green2 sentences2000Morgan Stanley, 958 S.W.2d 178, 179 (Tex.1997). 2000Morgan Stanley, 958 S.W.2d 178, 179 (Tex.1997). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
In re K.C.A.
green
2 sentences2000After an "In re Holloway motion to consider indigence" was filed in the court of appeals on January 21, 1999, that court ordered the district clerk and court reporter to prepare transcripts of the two indigence hearings conducted by the trial court. 29 S.W.3d 569 . 2000After an “In re Holloway motion to consider indigence” was filed in the court of appeals on January 21, 1999, that court ordered the district clerk and court reporter to prepare transcripts of the two indigence hearings conducted by the trial court. 29 S.W.3d 569 . | 2 | 2000–2000 |
Cuyler v. Sullivan
green
2 sentences1985Second, the Court held that without a trial objection, Holloway’s presumption of harm will not be applied. ‘In order to establish a violation of the Sixth Amendment, a defendant who raised no objection at trial must demonstrate that an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer’s performance.’ Id. [ 100 S.Ct. at 1718 ].” (Quoting the Panel Opinion at pp. 400-491.) 4 Further, in Holloway v. Arkansas, supra, the Court noted that when timely motion is made by defense counsel, representing several defendants, for appointment of separate counsel because of possible conflicts of inter 1985Second, the Court held that without a trial objection, Holloway’s presumption of harm will not be applied. ‘In order to establish a violation of the Sixth Amendment, a defendant who raised no objection at trial must demonstrate that an actual conflict of interest adversely affected his lawyer’s performance.’ Id. [ 100 S.Ct. at 1718 ].” (Quoting the Panel Opinion at pp. 400-491.) 4 Further, in Holloway v. Arkansas, supra, the Court noted that when timely motion is made by defense counsel, representing several defendants, for appointment of separate counsel because of possible conflicts of inter | 2 | 1984–1985 |
In Re Toyota Motor Corp.
green
2 sentences2016See Garcia, 734 S.W.2d at 345 ; In re Toyota Motor Corp., 191 S.W.3d at 503 . 2016See Garcia, 734 S.W.2d at 345 ; In re Toyota Motor Corp., 191 S.W.3d at 503 . 2. | 1 | 2016–2016 |
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.