8 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2023 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
in Re Greater McAllen Star Properties, Inc., Marilyn Hardison, and Jasen Hardisongreen2 sentences2023Greater McAllen Star Props., Inc., 444 S.W.3d at 748 . 2022Greater McAllen, 444 S.W.3d at 748 . –6– A trial judge must rule “within a reasonable time” on motions that are properly filed. | 1 | 4 |
Barnes v. Stategreen1 sentence2022In re Greater McAllen Star Props., Inc., 444 S.W.3d 743, 748 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi–Edinburg 2014, orig. proceeding); Barnes v. State, 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding). | 1 | 1 |
Gutierrez v. Stategreen1 sentence2013The parties proceeded to a trial on the merits on the original indictment containing the habitualization paragraphs. -8- (Tex.Crim.App. 2011), citing State v. Garcia-Cantu, 253 S.W.3d 236, 241 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008) and Gutierrez v. State, 221 S.W.3d 680, 687 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Garcia-Cantugreen1 sentence2013The parties proceeded to a trial on the merits on the original indictment containing the habitualization paragraphs. -8- (Tex.Crim.App. 2011), citing State v. Garcia-Cantu, 253 S.W.3d 236, 241 (Tex.Crim.App. 2008) and Gutierrez v. State, 221 S.W.3d 680, 687 (Tex.Crim.App. 2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Grant v. Wood
green
1 sentence2015This is to avoid a situation such as this Court faced in Grant v Wood, 916 S.W.2d 42 (Tex. App. - Hou. [1st Dist.] 1995, orig. proceeding), in which the trial judge refused to rule on a summary judgment thereby causing the right to an interlocutory appeal to effectively be held in abeyance by her inaction. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Woodard
green
1 sentence2013“As a general rule, appellate courts view the evidence in the light most favorable to the trial judge’s ruling, regardless of whether the judge granted or denied the suppression motion.” State v. Woodard, 341 S.W.3d 404 , 410 3 Likewise, nothing in the record indicates that the trial judge refused to rule on the motion and that Appellant objected to the refusal. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
Bingham v. State
green
2 sentences1994The Dallas Court of Appeals disagreed, holding that the instruction should have been given because, to hold otherwise, would permit the State “to do indirectly that which it cannot do directly.” Bingham, 833 S.W.2d at 544 . 1994The Dallas Court of Appeals disagreed, holding that the instruction should have been given because, to hold otherwise, would permit the State "to do indirectly that which it cannot do directly." Bingham, 833 S.W.2d at 544 . | 1 | 1994–1994 |
Euziere v. State
green
1 sentence1991Euziere v. State, 648 S.W.2d 700 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Rector v. State
green
1 sentence1991Rector v. State, 738 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.Cr.App.1986). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
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.