Legal Opinion

Carmell v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided August 17, 2000No. 2-97-197-CRPublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON REMAND

2Per curiam

On original submission, this court held the amended version of article 38.07 applied to Appellant’s case because it was a rule of procedure rather than a statute affecting the range of punishment or the elements of an offense. See Carmell v. State, 963 S.W.2d 833, 836 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1998, pet. ref'd). The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals refused Appellant’s petition for discretionary review, and certiorari was granted after appeal was taken to the United States Supreme Court. See Carmell v. Texas, 527 U.S. 1002, 119 S.Ct. 2336, 144 L.Ed.2d 234 (1999). In Carmell v.…

3Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Carmell v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 2000
  2. Carmell v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1999

4Cited by5 opinions

  1. Carmell v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2010
  2. Carmell v. QuartermanCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2008
  3. Carmell, Scott LeslieCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
  4. Scott Leslie Carmell v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2010
  5. Scott Leslie Carmell v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2010

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API