involuntariness claim (Texas) · Go Syfert
← Texas issues

involuntariness claim in Texas

15 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2025 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.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Oursbourn v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 2008 · cited in 5 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2011–2025
2 sentences

2025Where, as here, an involuntariness claim is advanced under the latter two theories, a confession is involuntary “only when there is police overreaching.” Id. at 169–70.

2014Unlike an involuntariness claim respecting Miranda rights, a claim that a purported waiver of the statutory rights enumerated in article 38.22 is involuntary “need not be predicated on police overreaching.” Leza, 351 S.W.3d at 352 (citing Oursbourn v. State, 259 S.W.3d 159, 172 (Tex. Crim.

35
United States of America Ex Rel. Murray Dickerson v. Alfred T. Rundle, Superintendent, State Correctional Institution,philadelphia, Pennsylvaniagreen
ca3 · 1970 · cited in 3 Texas opinions naming this issue, 2010–2010
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir. 1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim — Davis [ v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [ v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [ v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [ v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [ v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rig

33
Brown v. Stategreen
texcrimapp · 1997 · cited in 2 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1997–1997
2 sentences

1997In Fitzroy George Brown v. State, 943 S.W.2d 35 (Tex.Crim.App.1997), motion for reh’g granted, the court of criminal appeals has now held that a defendant “who receives deferred adjudication as part of a plea agreement may raise an involuntariness claim based upon the trial judge’s failure to give the required information” [the section 5(b) consequences of deferred adjudication], jBrawn, at 42.

1997A “defendant should be required to show that he would not have entered his plea had he been given the required information.” Id., at 42 .

12
Rivera v. Stategreen
texapp · 1997 · cited in 1 Texas opinions naming this issue, 1999–1999
1 sentence

1999See Rivera v. State , 952 S.W.2d 34, 35 (Tex. App.--San Antonio 1997, no pet.).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Leza v. State green
texcrimapp · 2011
2 sentences

2019Id.

2014Unlike an involuntariness claim respecting Miranda rights, a claim that a purported waiver of the statutory rights enumerated in article 38.22 is involuntary “need not be predicated on police overreaching.” Leza, 351 S.W.3d at 352 (citing Oursbourn v. State, 259 S.W.3d 159, 172 (Tex. Crim.

22014–2019
Jordan v. State green
texcrimapp · 2001
2 sentences

2011Jordan v. State, 54 S.W.3d 783 , 785– 86 (Tex. Crim.

2011Jordan v. State , 54 S.W.3d 783 , 785–86 (Tex. Crim.

22011–2011
Cicenia v. Lagay green
scotus · 1958
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

12010–2010
Crooker v. California red
scotus · 1958
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

12010–2010
Spano v. New York green
scotus · 1959
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

12010–2010
Davis v. North Carolina green
scotus · 1966
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

12010–2010
Culombe v. Connecticut green
scotus · 1961
2 sentences

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

2010Dickerson v. Rundle, 430 F.2d 462, 465 (3d Cir.1970) ("In virtually every case relied upon by Dickerson in support of the involuntariness claim —Davis [v. North Carolina, 384 U.S. 737 , 86 S.Ct. 1761 , 16 L.Ed.2d 895 (1966)], Haynes, Culombe [v. Connecticut, 367 U.S. 568 , 81 S.Ct. 1860 , 6 L.Ed.2d 1037 (1961)], Spano [v. New York, 360 U.S. 315 , 79 S.Ct. 1202 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1265 (1959)], Cicenia [v. La Gay, 357 U.S. 504 , 78 S.Ct. 1297 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1523 (1958)], and Crooker [v. California, 357 U.S. 433 , 78 S.Ct. 1287 , 2 L.Ed.2d 1448 (1958)] — the failure to caution the accused of his rights or

12010–2010
Garcia v. State green
texapp · 1995
1 sentence

2008In collaterally attacking the 2 validity of prior convictions on the basis of a denial of the right to counsel, appellant has the burden of proof to show the involuntariness of the waiver of his right to counsel.1 Id. at 566 .

12008–2008

Statutes the citing opinions construe

TX § Tex. Penal Code § 19.02 (3) USC § 18u.s.c.3501 (3) USC § 42u.s.c.1983 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 15 (1997–2025) PA 4 (1967–2021) IN 3 (1998–2012) NY 3 (1966–1989) CT 2 (1967–1996) MA 2 (1980–2016) MD 2 (1969–1999) FL 2 (2002–2022) CA 2 (2012–2023)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check