7 Texas opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2012 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 |
|---|---|---|
Oursbourn v. Stategreen1 sentence2012See Oursbourn, 259 S.W.3d at 174 ; see also Perrucci v. State, No. 03-10-00765-CR, 2011 WL 3890390 , at *10-11 (Tex.App.-Austin Aug. 31, 2011, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (Section 6 instruction not required because there was no evidence of involuntariness when the defendant testified that the statement he made was voluntary and that he was not coerced or threatened). | 1 | 1 |
Ex Parte Yekaterina Tanklevskayagreen1 sentence2012Aug. 30, 2010) (same); cf. Ex parte Tanklevskaya, 361 S.W.3d 86, 99 (Tex.App.-Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. filed) (rejecting an admonition warning of possible adverse immigration consequences as curing prejudice when Padilla required a specific warning). | 1 | 1 |
McMillan v. Stategreen1 sentence1993See, McMillan v. State, 703 S.W.2d at 344-345 (and cases cited therein). [9] It is notable that immediately following the admonition requirement, § 5(a) does distinguish between felonies and misdemeanors with regard to the length of probation: ... | 1 | 1 |
Coakley v. Reisinggreen1 sentence1991Coakley v. Reising, 436 S.W.2d 315, 318 (Tex.1968), appeal after remand sub nom. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Texas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sims v. State
green
2 sentences2008The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recently observed that "Extraneous-offense evidence is 'inherently prejudicial, tends to confuse the issues, and forces the accused to defend himself against charges not part of the present case against him.'" Sims v. State , No. PD-1575-07, 2008 Tex. Crim. 2008These steps must be taken in sequence, and counsel cannot object and move for an instruction and mistrial without obtaining a ruling on the objection. *215 The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recently observed that “Extraneous-offense evidence is ‘inherently prejudicial, tends to confuse the issues, and forces the accused to defend himself against charges not part of the present case against him.’ ” Sims v. State, No. PD-1575-07, — S.W.3d -, 2008 WL 2596950 , 2008 Tex.Crim.App. | 2 | 2008–2008 |
Garza v. State
green
1 sentence1983Garza, supra. Here the objection was sustained and prompt and appropriate instructions given to the jury. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.