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.
9 Texas opinions name it 1 courts 1998–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Boyle v. Statered2 sentences2020See Boyle, 820 S.W.2d at 148 n.9; see also Robisheaux v. State, 483 S.W.3d 205, 223-24 (Tex. App.—Austin 2016, pet. ref’d). 2017See Boyle, 820 S.W.2d at 148 n.9. 2Because we recognize that we are not the final authority to determine the admissibility of this evidence, we have intentionally avoided a detailed discussion or recitation of the content of the text messages. | 4 | 4 |
Brandon Robisheaux v. Stategreen2 sentences2020See Boyle, 820 S.W.2d at 148 n.9; see also Robisheaux v. State, 483 S.W.3d 205, 223-24 (Tex. App.—Austin 2016, pet. ref’d). 2016Evid. 412(b)(2)(A), (b)(3) (emphasis added). 1 “ ‘The function of the balancing test of Rule 412(b)(3) is generally consistent with that under Rule 403,’ but ‘the general balancing test under Rule 403 weighs in favor of the admissibility of evidence, while Rule 412(b)(3) weighs against the admissibility of evidence.’ ” Robisheaux v. State, 483 S.W.3d 205, 223-24 (Tex.App.-Austin 2016, no. pet. h.) (quoting Stephens v. State, 978 S.W,2d 728, 732-33 (Tex.App.Austin 1998, pet. ref'd); see Tex.R. | 2 | 3 |
Stephens v. Stategreen2 sentences2024Id. 2016Evid. 412(b)(2)(A), (b)(3) (emphasis added). 1 “ ‘The function of the balancing test of Rule 412(b)(3) is generally consistent with that under Rule 403,’ but ‘the general balancing test under Rule 403 weighs in favor of the admissibility of evidence, while Rule 412(b)(3) weighs against the admissibility of evidence.’ ” Robisheaux v. State, 483 S.W.3d 205, 223-24 (Tex.App.-Austin 2016, no. pet. h.) (quoting Stephens v. State, 978 S.W,2d 728, 732-33 (Tex.App.Austin 1998, pet. ref'd); see Tex.R. | 1 | 3 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Allen Tercero
green
1 sentence2015See Villarreal, 014 WL 6734178 , at *17–18; Tercero, 2015 WL 1544519 , at *5–6; see also Bowman, 2015 WL 557205 , at * 9. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
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.