Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ayala v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided June 2, 1982No. 235-82Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTeague, Judge

I concur only in the result that the majority of this Court reaches in this cause — that the appellant’s petition for discretionary review should be refused.

I must also confess to the reader that I have yet to figure out why anyone would sound the alarm, in a case such as this, as has been done in this cause by the majority. The appellant’s petition for discretionary review should have been summarily refused, and the members of this Court should not be wasting their valuable and limited time on this case, because of reasons hereinafter stated.

I, therefore, only concur in the result reached by…

2Cases cited21 opinions

  1. Anders v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. High v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
  3. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  4. Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Cuyler v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API