Maldonado v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DICE, Judge.
The conviction is for murder; the punishment, life.
Two grounds of error are urged by appellant in his amended brief filed with the clerk of the trial court.
In his first ground, appellant insists that the court erred in admitting the testimony of Attorney Fred Semaan regarding a telephone conversation between him and Mr. Semaan because an attorney-client relationship existed between them and the telephone conversation with his attorney was privileged, under the provisions of Arts. 38.06 and 38.10, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.
Appellant filed a motion to suppress certain evidence,…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Pugh v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1964
- Harris v. DaughertyTexas Supreme Court · 1889
- Butler and Jones v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1931
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hollins v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Jackson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
- Swindell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973
- Martin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1970
- Cathey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.