9 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1982–2015 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Brooks v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Brooks v. State, 990 S.W.2d 278, 287 (Tex.Crim.App. 1999); see also TEX. | 1 | 1 |
Stewart v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Stewart, 129 S.W.3d at 97 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Benitez v. State
green
2 sentences2008Benitez, 5 S.W.3d at 918 . 2008Benitez , 5 S.W.3d at 918 . | 3 | 2008–2008 |
State v. Munoz
green
1 sentence2015All Citations The exception to Texas's exclusionary rule is legislative and found in Article 38.23(b) --- S.W.3d----, 2015 WL 4719559 10 State v. Munoz, --- S.W.3d ---- (2015) 2015wC4119559 - - - - - - - - - - ----------- ------~-----·----~--~·-----·-----·- End of Document @2015 Thomson Reuters. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Madden v. State
green
1 sentence2008But the central issue on an article 38.23 instruction is not the admissibility of the evidence, but rather, 5 At the time of appellant’s trial and appeal, this Court had not yet delivered its opinion in Madden v. State, 242 S.W.3d 504 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.
green
1 sentence2006Jacques' Remaining Claims of Ineffective Assistance Jacques also contends he received ineffective assistance because trial counsel failed to object to the admission of the blood test results; Jacques contends his trial counsel should have objected to the results' admissibility under Rule 702 of the Texas Rules of Evidence, under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc. , 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and under Kelly v. State , 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Kelly v. State
green
1 sentence2006Jacques' Remaining Claims of Ineffective Assistance Jacques also contends he received ineffective assistance because trial counsel failed to object to the admission of the blood test results; Jacques contends his trial counsel should have objected to the results' admissibility under Rule 702 of the Texas Rules of Evidence, under Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms., Inc. , 509 U.S. 579 (1993), and under Kelly v. State , 824 S.W.2d 568 (Tex. Crim. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Ferguson v. State
green
2 sentences1982Without citing us to the record, appellant asserts that his “objection to the admissibility of blood test comparisons was overruled.” For its part, the State concedes the admission of the blood test results in this cause constituted error since neither appellant’s consent, nor a warrant was obtained authorizing the seizure of appellant’s blood, citing Ferguson v. State, 573 S.W.2d 516 (Tex.Cr.App.1978); the State contends, however, that admission of appellant’s blood type into evidence was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. 1982Ferguson, supra. Once again we are asked to address a ground of error without much reference to its basis. | 1 | 1982–1982 |
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.
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.