Legal Opinion
Montanez v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Decided April 26, 2006No. PD-894-04PublishedCited by 837 opinions
1Opinion of the Court 1
OPINION
2Opinion of the Court · KeaslerKeasler, J.
in which PRICE, HERVEY, HOLCOMB, and COCHRAN, JJ., joined.
Aníbal Montanez filed a motion to suppress claiming that his consent for the search of the vehicle, which yielded cocaine, was not voluntary. The trial court denied the motion. Reversing the trial court, the court of appeals held that the record does not contain clear and convincing evidence to support the trial court’s finding.1 We find that the court of appeals correctly determined that the issue was preserved for review, but erred in failing to apply the standard of review provided in Guzman v. State.2
Facts and Procedural…
3Cases cited16 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Anderson v. City of Bessemer CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Guzman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1997
- State v. RossCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
- Carmouche v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
4Cited by837 opinions
- Amador v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
- Crain v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2010
- Anderson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2009
- State of Texas v. Duran, AnthonyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
- State v. S.S.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 2017
832 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.