Cases from cite.case.law:

JOHNSON, v. STATE, 218 So. 3d 957 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2017)

. . . Section 38.22[, Florida Statutes (2008)] gave the circuit judge: jurisdiction to hear and punish the . . .

DeMARTIN, v. STATE, 188 So. 3d 87 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes, states, “Every court may punish contempts against it whether such contempts . . .

PLANK, v. STATE, 190 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 2016)

. . . Specifically, section 38.22, Florida Statutes (2013), provides: “Every court may punish contempts against . . .

NATION, a v. SAN JUAN COUNTY, a, 150 F. Supp. 3d 1253 (D. Utah 2015)

. . . deviation of 37.69% from an “ideal”; San Juan County’s expert, Kimball William Brace, found a deviation of 38.22% . . . San Juan County finds a slightly higher deviation at 38.22%. (Dkt. 198, p. 23.) . . .

GARCIA, v. STEPHENS,, 793 F.3d 513 (5th Cir. 2015)

. . . holding that a written confession signed by Garcia violated Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 38.22 . . . Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 38.22 As an initial matter, Garcia urges that the merits of . . . Id. at 387 ("We agree that appellant's statement, while sufficient to comply with Article 38.22, Section . . .

GARCIA, v. DIRECTOR, TDCJ- CID,, 73 F. Supp. 3d 693 (E.D. Tex. 2014)

. . . Ann. art. 38.22. . . . initially reversed Garcia’s conviction and held that the written statement did not comply with art. 38.22 . . . The TCCA explained that “[u]nder art. 38.22, § 2(b) the written statement must show on its face the knowing . . . , intelligent, and voluntary waiver of each of the rights of, art. 38.22, § 2(a). . . . Art. 38.22, § 2(b) is clear and unambiguous, and ‘the Legislature is constitutionally entitled to expect . . .

WEINBERG v. WEINBERG, U A, 137 So. 3d 600 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . Rojo, 84 So.3d 1259,1261-62 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (citing § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (2010)). . . .

CAVALLARO, v. OMNI PROPERTIES, 133 So. 3d 1121 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2014)

. . . See § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (2010); Parisi v. Broward Cnty., 769 So.2d 359 (Fla.2000). . . .

ALCOA, INC. v. BONNEVILLE POWER ADMINISTRATION U. S. v. v. U. S. v. v. U. S. v. U. S., 698 F.3d 774 (9th Cir. 2012)

. . . to be served at a weighted average annual IP rate linked to BPA’s Tier 1 PF rate forecasted to be $38.22 . . .

ROJO, v. ROJO,, 84 So. 3d 1259 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2012)

. . . See § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (2010); Parisi v. Broward Cnty., 769 So.2d 359 (Fla.2000). . . .

HALLEY, IV, v. THALER, Of, 448 F. App'x 518 (5th Cir. 2011)

. . . Halley also argued below that Medi's testimony was inadmissible under Article 38.22 of the Texas Rules . . .

HERNANDEZ, v. THALER,, 787 F. Supp. 2d 504 (W.D. Tex. 2011)

. . . in allowing the State to elicit testimony regarding Hernandez’s written statement, and that Article 38.22 . . .

CHARLES, v. THALER,, 629 F.3d 494 (5th Cir. 2011)

. . . Ann. art. 38.22, § 3(a) (Vernon 2005). . . .

BADEN- WINTERWOOD, v. LIFE TIME FITNESS INC., 729 F. Supp. 2d 965 (S.D. Ohio 2010)

. . . b.October 16, 2005 through November 16, 2005 The first 6 overtime hours: $12.73 x .5 = $6.37 x 6 hours = $38.22 . . .

ALAN, II, v. STATE, 39 So. 3d 343 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . .; see also § 38.22 Fla. . . .

SCHAAB, a k a v. STATE, 33 So. 3d 763 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2010)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (2008), provides both circuit and county courts with the authority to . . . Section 38.22 gave the circuit judge jurisdiction to hear and punish the contempt. . . .

In J. SAPIENZA,, 417 B.R. 1 (E.D. Mich. 2009)

. . . reduction was offset to some extent by the Bankruptcy Court's award of $122.50 in costs beyond the $38.22 . . .

MALDONADO, v. THALER,, 662 F. Supp. 2d 684 (S.D. Tex. 2009)

. . . Pro. art. 38.22(3)(a)(3) which requires, before a recorded statement becomes admissible, that "the recording . . .

ROGERS, v. QUARTERMAN,, 555 F.3d 483 (5th Cir. 2009)

. . . Proc.Code Ann. art. 38.22, § 6 (Vernon 2005). . . .

HARVEY, v. STATE, 32 So. 3d 61 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . The paragraph includes this statement: There is no reason to believe that the statute [section 38.22, . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 986 So. 2d 576 (Fla. 2008)

. . . Statutory References § 38.22, Fla. Stat. Power to punish con-tempts. § 38.23, Fla. Stat. . . .

UNITED STATES v. BOSTON, a. k. a., 249 F. App'x 807 (11th Cir. 2007)

. . . Ann. art. 38.22 § 3 (2007); Minnesota v. Scales, 518 N.W.2d 587, 591 (Minn.1994); Stephan v. . . .

AMADOR, v. QUARTERMAN,, 458 F.3d 397 (5th Cir. 2006)

. . . The trial court ultimately ruled that Amador’s statement was admissible under Article 38.22, section . . . Proc.Code Ann. art. 38.22(3)(c) (Vernon Supp.1994). . . . Amador argued that the admission of this testimony under Article 38.22, section 3 of the Texas Code of . . . First, it indicated that Amador’s pretrial motion to suppress on Article 38.22 grounds was insufficient . . . Proc.Code Ann. art. 38.22(3)(c). . . .

SARIDAKIS, v. STATE, 936 So. 2d 33 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2006)

. . . State, 284 So.2d 673 (Fla.1973): Section 38.22 of the Florida Statutes, F.S.A., authorizes courts to . . . . 2d DCA 1986), “[w]hile the contempt power of Florida courts has been codified by statute, section 38.22 . . .

PRIETO, TDCJ No. v. DRETKE,, 386 F. Supp. 2d 767 (W.D. Tex. 2005)

. . . court’s refusal to voir dire the jury regarding possible bias in relation to Section 2(b) of Article 38.22 . . .

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, v. LEWIS, 355 F. Supp. 2d 870 (E.D. Mich. 2005)

. . . . § 38.22(3)(a). . . .

GUIDRY, v. DRETKE,, 397 F.3d 306 (5th Cir. 2005)

. . . Proc. art. 38.22 § 6 requires specific findings of fact when the voluntariness of a confession is raised . . .

UNITED STATES v. MONTGOMERY,, 390 F.3d 1013 (7th Cir. 2004)

. . . Art. 38.22 § 3(a) (Vernon 2004) (providing that no oral statement of an accused “made as a result of . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE, THE FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE, THE FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, THE FLORIDA FAMILY LAW RULES OF PROCEDURE, THE FLORIDA RULES OF JUVENILE PROCEDURE, AND THE FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 887 So. 2d 1090 (Fla. 2004)

. . . Statutory References § 38.22, Fla. Stat. Power to punish con-tempts. § 38.23, Fla. Stat. . . .

SIMPSON v. C. YOUNG, III, M., 884 So. 2d 186 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . See § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (2003); cf. Wells v. . . .

PACE, v. COCKRELL,, 75 F. App'x 308 (5th Cir. 2003)

. . . Ann. art 38.22 § 6; cf. Sims v. Georgia, 385 U.S. 538, 544, 87 S.Ct. 639, 17 L.Ed.2d 593 (1967). . . .

J. D. COUSINS SONS, INC. v. HARTFORD STEAM BOILER INSPECTION AND INSURANCE COMPANY,, 341 F.3d 149 (2d Cir. 2003)

. . . . § 38.22. . . .

BUSBY v. COCKRELL,, 73 F. App'x 49 (5th Cir. 2003)

. . . Pro.Code Ann. art. 38.22 § 7 (Vernon 1979). . . .

AMENDMENTS TO THE FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 848 So. 2d 1069 (Fla. 2003)

. . . Statutory References § 38.22, Fla. Stat. Power to punish con-tempts. § 38.23, Fla. Stat. . . .

SOFFAR, v. COCKRELL,, 300 F.3d 588 (5th Cir. 2002)

. . . Ann. art. 38.22 (1977); see also Alfaro v. Texas, 638 S.W.2d 891 (Tex.Crim.App.1982). . . . . Ann art. 38.22 (1977). . . .

J. GRAVES, v. STATE, 821 So. 2d 459 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . See § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (2001). . . .

GEORGIA, v. ASHCROFT,, 195 F. Supp. 2d 25 (D.D.C. 2002)

. . . District 10 3.65 3.36 2.89 District 11 ■ 29.10 26.36 26.14 District 12 43.19 39.00 39.10 District 13 41.97 38.22 . . .

R. KRAMER, v. STATE, 800 So. 2d 319 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1999), authorizes courts to punish contempt but contains no penalty . . .

BOUIE, v. STATE, 784 So. 2d 521 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2001)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1997), grants courts the authority to punish con-tempts. . . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1997), provides: Every court may punish contempts against it whether . . .

L. SHEALY, H. Sr. M. E. v. CITY OF ALBANY, GEORGIA, A, 137 F. Supp. 2d 1359 (M.D. Ga. 2001)

. . . Matthew, Bender, Damages in Tort Actions, v. 4, § 38.22[3] (1997). . . .

GRIFFIS, v. STATE, 759 So. 2d 668 (Fla. 2000)

. . . See §§ 38.22, 900.04 Fla. Stat. (1997). . See § 921.0011, Fla. Stat. (1997). . See § 921.0021, Fla. . . .

C. LUSSY, v. FENNIMAN, P. A., 763 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . See § 38.22, Fla. Stat. (1999); South Dade Farms, Inc. v. Peters, 88 So.2d 891, 898 (Fla.1956). . . .

LEASETEC CORPORATION, v. ORIENT SYSTEMS, INC. a k a a k a, 85 F. Supp. 2d 1310 (S.D. Fla. 1999)

. . . Leibstone Associates and Leibstone, jointly and severally, and (ii) $76,-544.13 (plus a per diem of $38.22 . . .

ETHERIDGE, v. L. JOHNSON,, 49 F. Supp. 2d 963 (S.D. Tex. 1999)

. . . the statement complied with the admissibility requirements outlined in Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 38.22 . . . Eth-eridge confined his claim on direct appeal to the admissibility of the statement under article 38.22 . . .

L. GRIBBLE v. L. JOHNSON,, 8 F. Supp. 2d 942 (S.D. Tex. 1998)

. . . appealed only his claim that the warnings given to him prior to his statement did not comply with Article 38.22 . . .

BURK, v. WASHINGTON,, 713 So. 2d 988 (Fla. 1998)

. . . conclusion after noting that the statute which authorized imprisonment and fines for contempt, section 38.22 . . .

EARHART, v. L. JOHNSON,, 132 F.3d 1062 (5th Cir. 1998)

. . . Earhart received before giving a statement substantially complied with the requirements of article 38.22 . . . The record further reveals that Earhart had been warned in accord with article 38.22 on at least two . . . including the right to remain silent), had signed a written rights form advising him of his article 38.22 . . . Because admission of the statement did not violate article 38.22, the State contends, Earhart cannot . . . This warning came on the heels of other warnings more precisely tracking the language of article 38.22 . . .

BLALOCK, v. RICE,, 707 So. 2d 738 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . See §§ 38.22, 775.02, Fla. Stat. (1995); see also Moorman v. . . .

WEST, Jr. v. L. JOHNSON,, 92 F.3d 1385 (5th Cir. 1996)

. . . , after repeated warnings, knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived his rights under Article 38.22 . . . The rights provided in Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 38.22 include all those of Miranda and . . . and during any questioning; and (5) he has the right to terminate the interview at any time:” Art. 38.22 . . .

WALKER, v. E. BENTLEY,, 660 So. 2d 313 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . As the court stated: We take notice of [section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1949)] but do not construe it . . .

WELLS, v. STATE, 654 So. 2d 145 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1995)

. . . . § 38.22, Fla.Stat. (1993); R.M.P. v. . . .

SCHENCK, v. STATE, 645 So. 2d 71 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1994)

. . . and found guilty by [] Jury/ [X] Court of the following crime(s) Contempt of Court [Offense Statute] 38.22 . . .

In M. BEDELL,, 173 B.R. 463 (Bankr. W.D.N.Y. 1994)

. . . Smith Heating & Cooling in the amount of $38.22. . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA RULES OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 606 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 1992)

. . . Until section 38.22, Florida Statutes, was amended in 1945 there prevailed in Florida the common law . . . The amendment of section 38.22, Florida Statutes, however, has been construed to no longer justify the . . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes, as amended in 1945, provides that all issues of law or fact shall be . . . By enacting section 38.22, Florida Statutes, which impliedly prohibits trial by jury the legislature . . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes, as discussed in the preceding notes, is concerned with procedure in . . .

In AMENDMENTS TO FLORIDA PROBATE RULES, 607 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 1992)

. . . Statutory References ¾⅛⅛ 38.22 — 38,23, Fla.Stat. . . .

STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, v. SCHREIBER, In, 561 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1989) provides that every court may punish contempt committed against . . . gain subject matter jurisdiction to make its judicial inquiry pursuant to section 26.012 or section 38.22 . . .

KELLY, v. A. LYNAUGH,, 862 F.2d 1126 (5th Cir. 1988)

. . . Code Ann. art. 38.22 § 3 (Vernon Supp.1988). . . . . Code Ann. art. 38.22 § 7 (Vernon 1979). . . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR. In Re RULES OF PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP PROCEDURE, 537 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 1988)

. . . Statutory References F.S. 38.22-38.23 Contempt. . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR. In Re RULES OF PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP PROCEDURE, 531 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 1988)

. . . Statutory References F.S. 38.22 — 38.23 Contempt. . . .

SMITH, III, v. STATE, 548 So. 2d 673 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1987)

. . . State, 642 S.W.2d 489, 490 (Tex.Crim.App.1982) (Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann. art. 38.22, § 3 (Vernon 1979) . . .

MANN, v. A. LYNAUGH,, 688 F. Supp. 1121 (N.D. Tex. 1987)

. . . See Art. 38.22, Tex. Code Crim. Proc. (Vernon Supp.1987). . . . .

J. R. BETSON, Jr. v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE,, 802 F.2d 365 (9th Cir. 1986)

. . . Commissioner, 357 F.2d 504, 505-06 (9th Cir.1966); 7 Mertens, Law of Federal Income Taxation § 38.22, . . .

FLOYD, v. E. BENTLEY,, 496 So. 2d 862 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . trials in contempt proceedings, we would also be required to find a legislative intent to repeal section 38.22 . . . that the legislature has seen fit to take such a drastic step as to repeal or otherwise modify section 38.22 . . .

MOORMAN, v. E. BENTLEY,, 490 So. 2d 186 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . While the contempt power of Florida courts has been codified by statute, section 38.22, Florida Statutes . . .

EVANS, v. O. L. McCOTTER,, 790 F.2d 1232 (5th Cir. 1986)

. . . Evans argues further that admission of the oral statement violated Tex.Code Crim.P.Ann. art. 38.22, § . . . The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals rejected this claim, holding that current art. 38.22, § 3 was not . . .

GREAT ATLANTIC INSURANCE COMPANY, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,, 773 F.2d 976 (8th Cir. 1985)

. . . See 5 Moore’s Federal Practice H 38.22 at 38-185 (2d ed. 1985). . . . par-ol evidence to add to, alter or deny its terms is not admissible.” 5 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶ 38.22 . . .

G. CATHERINES, J. v. COPYTELE, INC., 602 F. Supp. 1019 (E.D.N.Y. 1985)

. . . respectively an additional 200,000 shares of CopyTele common stock and together Krusos and DiSanto own 38.22 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR RE AMENDMENT TO RULES- PROBATE AND GUARDIANSHIP, 458 So. 2d 1079 (Fla. 1984)

. . . Statutory References F.S. 38.22-38.23 Contempt. . . .

MAR- LEN OF LOUISIANA, INC. v. PARSONS- GILBANE, a, 732 F.2d 444 (5th Cir. 1984)

. . . this case seeks reformation of the contract, the suit is equitable in nature. 5 Moore’s Fed.Practice 38.22 . . .

THE FLORIDA BAR, v. W. FURMAN, d b a, 451 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 1984)

. . . The legislature recognized this by enacting sections 38.22 and 38.23, Florida Statutes (1983), specifically . . .

PORTER, v. W. J. ESTELLE, Jr., 709 F.2d 944 (5th Cir. 1983)

. . . This rule, Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 (1967), provides: 1. . . .

Dr. A. GUTSTEIN, v. Dr. F. McDERMOTT,, 554 F. Supp. 966 (M.D. Pa. 1983)

. . . plaintiffs also seek declaratory judgments on the constitutionality, and enforceability of 49 Pa.Code § 38.22 . . .

R. M. P. a v. JONES,, 419 So. 2d 618 (Fla. 1982)

. . . . § 38.22, Fla.Stat. (1979). Although R. M. . . . Section 38.22 provides: Every court may punish contempts against it whether such contempts be direct, . . .

THOMAS A. EDISON COLLEGE, INC. a k a A. a k a A. a k a A. St. C. v. STATE BOARD OF INDEPENDENT COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES,, 411 So. 2d 257 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

. . . Section 38.22, Florida Statutes (1973) authorizes courts to impose imprisonment and a fine for contempt . . .

LANGBERT, v. I. LANGBERT,, 409 So. 2d 1066 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Under Sections 38.22 and 38.23, Florida Statutes, Florida judges are granted broad powers of contempt . . .

SELLERS, v. W. J. ESTELLE,, 651 F.2d 1074 (5th Cir. 1981)

. . . constitutional sense” (Record p. 200), and that “Cantera’s statements would have been inadmissible” under art. 38.22 . . . Article 38.22 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure reads in pertinent part: Sec. 3. . . .

MARTIN M. v. STATE, 397 So. 2d 1012 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1981)

. . . Under Florida Statutes, Section 38.22, “all questions of law and fact” are to be determined by the trial . . .

UNITED STATES v. D. SONDERUP,, 639 F.2d 294 (5th Cir. 1981)

. . . Ann. art. 38.22. . . .

R. M. P. a v. JONES,, 392 So. 2d 301 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

. . . My authority to enforce my own order is set forth in Section 38.22, F.S., entitled Power to Punish Contempts . . .

JUREK, v. W. J. ESTELLE, Jr., 623 F.2d 929 (5th Cir. 1980)

. . . Art. 38.22(1) if under subsection (a) it was “shown to be the voluntary statement of [an] accused taken . . . This version of article 38.22 was effective between August, 1967 and August, 1977. . . . . Jurek’s trial because it had led to the discovery of Wendy Adams’ body, see Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 . . . Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 (magistrate’s warning must be given before any written confession is taken . . . that a hearing was withheld until interrogation had produced confession”); Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 . . .

HARRYMAN, v. W. J. ESTELLE, Jr., 616 F.2d 870 (5th Cir. 1980)

. . . the ground that the statement was, in any event, properly admissible under Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 . . .

HARRYMAN, v. W. J. ESTELLE, Jr., 597 F.2d 927 (5th Cir. 1979)

. . . motion, holding the statement admissible as the res gestae of the offense under Tex.Code Crim.Proc. art. 38.22 . . . Code Crim.Proc. art 38.22 § 5 (1979)]. . . . Art. 38.22, § 1(f) of the former Texas Code of Criminal Procedure provided: . . . .

GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, v. ACRES OF LAND, G. M. B. SANDERS, a k a D. Jr. GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, v. ACRES OF LAND, G. M. W. GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, v. ACRES OF LAND, G. M. H. Jr., 596 F.2d 644 (5th Cir. 1979)

. . . Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure: Civil § 3051 at 119-20; 5 Moore’s Federal Practice 38.22[2] at . . .

GILMOUR, v. STATE, 358 So. 2d 63 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1978)

. . . Sullivan, 157 Fla. 496, 26 So.2d 509; §§ 38.22 and 38.23, Fla.Stat., F.S.A. . . .

UNITED STATES v. GONZALEZ, UNITED STATES v. CARREREA, a k a, 548 F.2d 1185 (5th Cir. 1977)

. . . Art. 38.22, Texas Code of Crim.Procedure. . . .

AARON, v. STATE, 345 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 1977)

. . . The statutory authority contained in Section 38.22, Florida Statutes, recognizes and is a restatement . . .

JACKSON, v. STATE, 345 So. 2d 645 (Fla. 1977)

. . . from a decision of the Hillsborough County Circuit Court upholding the constitutionality of Section 38.22 . . . Appellant was not entitled to a jury trial, and Section 38.22, Florida Statutes, and Florida Rule of . . .

PILCHER, v. W. J. ESTELLE, Jr., 528 F.2d 623 (5th Cir. 1976)

. . . The limitations on admissibility of oral or written confessions under Art. 38.22 of the Texas Code of . . . Art. 38.22 (1975 Supp.) seems stricter than those required by the case law interpreting Miranda in that . . .

WASHINGTON, v. W. J. ESTELLE,, 525 F.2d 1213 (5th Cir. 1976)

. . . admissible as res gestae of the crime and the arrest under Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Ann., Art. 38.22 . . .

NAT HARRISON ASSOCIATES, INC. v. LOUISVILLE GAS AND ELECTRIC CO., 512 F.2d 511 (6th Cir. 1975)

. . . contract, however, is equitable in nature and hence triable to the court. 5 Moore’s Federal Practice § 38.22 . . .

WILSON, v. W. J. ESTELLE,, 504 F.2d 562 (5th Cir. 1974)

. . . There is no merit to the contention that Art. 38.22, Vernon’s Ann.Tex. . . .

J. LAVALLIS v. W. J. ESTELLE,, 370 F. Supp. 238 (S.D. Tex. 1974)

. . . Under article 38.22 of the Vernon’s Ann. . . .

RANDALL, v. Dr. BETO,, 369 F. Supp. 984 (N.D. Tex. 1973)

. . . Vernon’s Tex.Code Crim.P.Ann. art. 38.22. . . . .

AARON, v. STATE, 284 So. 2d 673 (Fla. 1973)

. . . Section 38.22 of the Florida Statutes, F. . . .

JOHN B. HARDWICKE COMPANY AND CHARLES E. PRATT v. THE UNITED STATES, 199 Ct. Cl. 388 (Ct. Cl. 1972)

. . . 8.36 acres of the Hardwicke property and is an easement for levee and spoils; 806-H burdens a total of 38.22 . . .

TWITCHCO, INC. v. UNITED STATES, 348 F. Supp. 330 (M.D. Ala. 1972)

. . . . § 1.111-1(a); Reg. 118, Sec. 38.22(b) (12)-1. . . .

NEW ENGLAND POWER COMPANY, v. ASIATIC PETROLEUM CORPORATION,, 456 F.2d 183 (1st Cir. 1972)

. . . See 5 Moore’s Federal Practice ¶¶ 38.21 and 38.22 (2d ed. 1971); F. . . .

EDWARDS, v. Dr. J. BETO,, 446 F.2d 18 (5th Cir. 1971)

. . . Tex.C.Cr.P., Article 38.22(b). . . .

ROPER v. Dr. J. BETO,, 318 F. Supp. 662 (E.D. Tex. 1970)

. . . Art. 38.22(b) and (e). . . .

MORENO, v. Dr. J. BETO,, 415 F.2d 154 (5th Cir. 1969)

. . . See also Tex.Code Crim.P.Ann. art. 38.22 (Supp.1968). . 372 U.S. 391, 83 S.Ct. 822, 9 L.Ed.2d 837 (1963 . . .