The court of appeals erred in overturning the grant of Mr. Newton’s motion to suppress by failing to follow existing authority, creating a split among the courts of appeal, and misapplying both precedent and cannons of statutory construction.
State’s Issues (1) “If an indictment’s grammar and usage errors produce awkward phrasing, does Delarosa v. State, 677 S.W.3d 668 (Tex. Crim. App. 2023), direct that it has failed to make an allegation?” (2) “Can an indictment that sets out all the statutory language for an enhancement in th...
“Did the appellate court misapply the legal sufficiency standard of review by: • crediting Appellant’s self-serving testimony which the trial court reasonably could have disregarded; and/or • resolving an ambiguity in Appellant’s testimony in Appellant’s favor; and/or • reweighing evidence in ...
“Did the First Court of Appeals err in holding that a child between the ages of fourteen and seventeen does not, as a matter of law, lack the ability to consent to sex for purposes of committing prostitution?”
“The Second Court of Appeals decided an important question of federal law that is not settled by the Court of Criminal appeals when it held that Appellant’s Fourteenth Amendment due process right was not violated by having a virtual hearing on a motion to adjudicate guilt and subsequent sentencin...
1. “The court of appeals misapplied the Guzman standard of review as it applied to the seizure of Rodriguez’s cell phone.” 2. “The court of appeals misapplied the attenuation of taint doctrine.” 3. “Does article 18.0125 apply to all cell phone searches or just the searches of cell phones seized p...
The First Court erred by creating a new Marin Category 1 prohibition and holding, in direct contradiction to Speth, that a defendant can complain for the first time on appeal about payments ordered as conditions of community supervision.
“The court of appeals erred in its interpretation of Tex. Pen. Code 39.06(d) when it basically eliminated the meaning of ‘prohibited from disclosure’ as written in the code and replaced it with a vague ‘information that is confidential’ standard.”
denotes a petition filled by SPA