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.
11 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 2005–2026 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hollis v. Stategreen2 sentences2026Grp., Inc., 357 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (“The record reflects the evidence suppressed by the trial court was secured by a search of a third person’s premises or property.”); see also Hollis v. State, 219 S.W.3d 446 , 457–58 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, no pet.) (“An accused lacks standing to challenge the admission of evidence obtained by searching an area in which he or she does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy.”). 2026Grp., Inc., 357 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (“The record reflects the evidence suppressed by the trial court was secured by a search of a third person’s premises or property.”); see also Hollis v. State, 219 S.W.3d 446 , 457–58 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, no pet.) (“An accused lacks standing to challenge the admission of evidence obtained by searching an area in which he or she does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy.”). | 6 | 6 |
Calloway v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Rakas, 439 U.S. at 143 , 99 S.Ct. 421 ; Calloway v. State, 743 S.W.2d 645, 651 (Tex.Crim.App.1988). 2007Rakas, 439 U.S. at 143 ; Calloway v. State, 743 S.W.2d 645, 651 (Tex. Crim. | 5 | 5 |
State v. Simon Property Group, Inc.green2 sentences2026Grp., Inc., 357 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (“The record reflects the evidence suppressed by the trial court was secured by a search of a third person’s premises or property.”); see also Hollis v. State, 219 S.W.3d 446 , 457–58 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, no pet.) (“An accused lacks standing to challenge the admission of evidence obtained by searching an area in which he or she does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy.”). 2026Grp., Inc., 357 S.W.3d 687, 691 (Tex. App.— Houston [14th Dist.] 2011, no pet.) (“The record reflects the evidence suppressed by the trial court was secured by a search of a third person’s premises or property.”); see also Hollis v. State, 219 S.W.3d 446 , 457–58 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, no pet.) (“An accused lacks standing to challenge the admission of evidence obtained by searching an area in which he or she does not have a legitimate expectation of privacy.”). | 2 | 2 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Rakas v. Illinois
green
2 sentences2007Rakas, 439 U.S. at 143 , 99 S.Ct. 421 ; Calloway v. State, 743 S.W.2d 645, 651 (Tex.Crim.App.1988). 2007Rakas, 439 U.S. at 143 , 99 S.Ct. 421 ; Calloway v. State, 743 S.W.2d 645, 651 (Tex.Crim.App.1988). | 5 | 2005–2007 |
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.