"Is it unreasonable under the Fourth Amendment for an officer to rely on a driver's implied consent to a blood draw when the driver was involved in an accident, there is probable cause to believe he is intoxicated, and where the driver's own unconsciousness prevents the officer from effectively...
"Did the court of appeals err in its assessment of probable cause for a warrantless arrest pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure article 14.01?"
"Should a court of appeals consider all of the totality of the circumstances, including (a) who initially searched a dorm room, (b) whether law enforcement had to conduct any additional search beyond a search conducted by university officials, and (c) whether a student consented to university o...
"The evidence is insufficient to support the conviction for the felony offense of failure to comply with sex offender registration requirements since the evidence conclusively establishes a reasonable doubt as to whether appellant intentionally or knowingly failed to comply with the Texas Sex Off...
"Did the Court of Appeals err when it 'utilize[d] Fourth Amendment precedent' in determining Art. 1 Section 9 of the Texas Constitution was not violated when the State obtained Appellant's cell phone records without a warrant in light of Richardson v. State, 865 S.W.2d 944 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993)?"
"The Court of Appeals erred in ruling that the audio recording of Mayra's custodial interrogation was admissible notwithstanding the fact that the recording device used was not capable of making an accurate recording." "The Court of Appeals applied the wrong standard in holding that the recordin...
"The attorney-client privilege belongs to the client and may not be waived without the client's consent. Appellant expressly waived attorney-client privilege but limited the waiver to one extraneous offense. Trial counsel questioned Appellant's previous counsel regarding privileged communicatio...
"Did the Court of Appeals err by finding that trial counsel's deficient performance regarding Appellant's probation eligibility, which Appellant relied upon in waiving his constitutional right to a jury trial, was not prejudicial under Strickland?"
denotes a petition filled by SPA