Texas Capitol

Search Petitions, Briefs and Summaries

Petition filed by SPA icon denotes a petition filled by SPA

HYLAND, RICHARD

08/22/2018

1. “The Thirteenth Court of Appeals erred in suggesting that the sustaining of a Franks motion and the purging of false statements from a search warrant affidavit triggers a heightened legal standard of ‘clear’ probable cause with regard to the remaining allegations in the affidavit.” 2.   “The ...

SIMPSON, ROBVIA

08/22/2018

Does Doan apply when a defendant enters a plea of “true” to new criminal offenses in a motion to proceed or probation revocation and does the true plea legally bind the defendant guilty in the new criminal offenses?

JONES, JORDAN BARTLETT

07/25/2018

1. “Is Tex. Penal Code § 21.16(b) a content-based restriction on speech that is subject to strict scrutiny?” 2. “May a court of appeals find a statute unconstitutional based on a manner and means that was not charged?” 3. “Is Tex. Penal Code § 21.16(b) facially constitutional?”

DAVENPORT, MARC

06/20/2018

1. “The Court of Appeals erred when it held that Government Code section 551.143 applies to conduct rather than speech and therefore is not subject to strict scrutiny.” 2. “The Court of Appeals erred when it held that Government Code section 551.143 is not unconstitutionally overbroad.” 3. The ...

PARKER, ADRIAN

06/20/2018

1. “Is ‘possession with intent to deliver’ a predicate offense for engaging in organized criminal activity because it falls within ‘unlawful manufacture, delivery . . . of a controlled substance’ which is one of EOCA’s enumerated predicate offenses?”  2. "Can an EOCA conviction predicated on an ...

RILEY, CHARLIE

06/20/2018

1. “The court of appeals erred in holding that § 551.143 does not violate the First Amendment.” 2. “The court of appeals erred in holding that § 551.143 is not void for vagueness.” 3. “The court of appeals erred in failing to address claims raised by Riley that were material to its disposition ...

CUEVAS, JEREMY

06/06/2018

“Is a peace officer moonlighting as private security ‘lawfully discharging an official duty’ for purposes of proving assault on a public servant when acting under Tex. Alco. Bev. Code § 101.07, which dictates: ‘all peace officers in the state’ ‘shall enforce the provisions of this code.’”

LITCHFIELD, MARGARET

06/06/2018

“In finding the evidence legally sufficient, did the Sixth Court of Appeals fail to consider: was the jury rationally justified in finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt?”