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.
14 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2021 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 |
|---|---|---|
Salazar v. Stategreen2 sentences2011Salazar v. State, 38 S.W.3d 141, 154 (Tex. Crim. 2011Salazar v. State , 38 S.W.3d 141, 154 (Tex. Crim. | 4 | 4 |
Miranda v. Arizonagreen2 sentences1994NOTES [1] See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 , 86 S.Ct. 1602, 1630 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] Subsection (a) provides: (a) the accused, prior to making the statement, either received from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of this code or received from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: (1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement that he makes may be used against him at his trial; (2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him in court; (3) he has the right to have a lawyer pres 1994NOTES [1] See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436, 478-79 , 86 S.Ct. 1602, 1630 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] Subsection (a) provides: (a) the accused, prior to making the statement, either received from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of this code or received from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: (1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement that he makes may be used against him at his trial; (2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him in court; (3) he has the right to have a lawyer pres | 2 | 3 |
Colorado v. Connellygreen2 sentences2015The State has the burden of showing that a defendant knowingly, voluntarily, and intelligently waived his constitutional rights, Miranda v. Arizona, Arizona 384 U.S. 436, 444 (1966), and must also demonstrate waiver by Connelly 479 U.S. 157 , 168 a preponderance of the evidence. 1997Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 168 , 107 S.Ct. 515, 522 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473, 485 (1986). [3] It must be shown that the accused, prior to and during the making of the statement (i.e. confession, admission, et.cetera) knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived the rights set out in the warnings prescribed by 38.22 § 2(a), V.A.C.C.P. | 1 | 2 |
Estrada v. Stategreen1 sentence2014That subsection provides that the accused, prior to making the statement, [must] either receive[] from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of [the code of criminal procedure] or receive[] from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: (1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement he makes may be used against him at his trial; (2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him in court; (3) he has the right to have a lawyer present to advise him prior to and during any questioning; 3 Amador, 221 S.W.3d at | 1 | 1 |
Barker v. Stategreen2 sentences1996“It seems to have been the unbroken rule since [the original enactment of the requirement that prior to making a statement, the accused must receive the warnings from the person to whom the statement is made] that the confession must have been made to the person named therein as the person to whom it is made.” Barker v. State, 164 Tex.Crim. 318 , 299 S.W.2d 142, 143 (1957). 1996“It seems to have been the unbroken rule since [the original enactment of the requirement that prior to making a statement, the accused must receive the warnings from the person to whom the statement is made] that the confession must have been made to the person named therein as the person to whom it is made.” Barker v. State, 164 Tex.Crim. 318 , 299 S.W.2d 142, 143 (1957). | 1 | 1 |
Russell v. Stategreen1 sentence1985No written statement made by an accused as a result of custodial interrogation is admissible as evidence against him in any criminal proceeding unless it is shown on the face of the statement that: "(a) the accused, prior to making the statement, either received from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of this code or received from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: "(1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement he makes may be used against him at his trial; "(2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ford v. State
green
1 sentence2021Ford, 305 S.W.3d at 533 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Amador v. State
green
1 sentence2014That subsection provides that the accused, prior to making the statement, [must] either receive[] from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of [the code of criminal procedure] or receive[] from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: (1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement he makes may be used against him at his trial; (2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence against him in court; (3) he has the right to have a lawyer present to advise him prior to and during any questioning; 3 Amador, 221 S.W.3d at | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Johnson v. State
green
1 sentence2014App. 2005); Johnson v. State, 68 S.W.3d 644 , 652–53 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Romero v. State
green
1 sentence2014Id. art. 38.22, § 2. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Alvarado v. State
green
1 sentence2001We also noted that Alvarado, supra, was distinguishable, because it dealt with the requirements of Miranda , rather than those of art. 38.22, and that in Alvarado , we had specifically stated that the issue of compliance with art. 38.22 was not presented to us. | 1 | 2001–2001 |
King v. State
green
1 sentence1985No written statement made by an accused as a result of custodial interrogation is admissible as evidence against him in any criminal proceeding unless it is shown on the face of the statement that: "(a) the accused, prior to making the statement, either received from a magistrate the warning provided in Article 15.17 of this code or received from the person to whom the statement is made a warning that: "(1) he has the right to remain silent and not make any statement at all and that any statement he makes may be used against him at his trial; "(2) any statement he makes may be used as evidence | 1 | 1985–1985 |