Legal Opinion

Schultz v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 10, 1989No. 187-87PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

MILLER, Judge.

Appellant was convicted by the jury of driving while intoxicated. Punishment was assessed by the court at five days in county jail.

On direct appeal, the First Court of Appeals in Houston affirmed appellant’s conviction holding, in a published opinion, Schultz v. State, 725 S.W.2d 411 (Tex.App.1987), that appellant was not entitled to an attorney under Article I, Section 10 of the Texas Constitution during the breathalyzer test. Thereafter, this Court granted appellant’s petition for discretionary review in order to review…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Forte v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
  2. Schultz v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)1987

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. State v. GrayCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API