Legal Opinion

Haight v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided June 9, 2004No. 623-03PublishedCited by 42 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

OPINION

2Opinion of the Court · HolcombHolcomb, J.

The question presented is whether the court of appeals erred in holding that appellant’s conviction for official oppression in this case is barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution. 1 We hold that the court of appeals erred.

We begin our discussion with a review of the relevant facts: A La Salle County grand jury presented two indictments charging appellant, then a sergeant in the Texas Department of Public Safety, with official oppression under Texas Penal Code § 39.03(a)(1). 2 , 3 The first mdictment alleged that appellant, on or…

3Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Benton v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1969
  2. Vick v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
  3. Haight v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2003

4Cited by42 opinions

  1. Gonzales v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2010
  2. Pizzo v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
  3. Loving v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
  4. Jourdan, RicardoCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2014
  5. Milner, Ex Parte Kenneth GlennCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013

37 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