Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Angel v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 7, 1987No. 912-85Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMcCORMICK, Judge

Because I disagree totally with the content of Section III of the majority opinion, I must vigorously register my dissent. I find Section III to be objectionable for three reasons which I will set out below.

First, Section III is totally unnecessary to the resolution of the instant case. In Section III, the majority needlessly addresses the propriety of the State’s claim of appellant’s lack of standing. Clearly the majority is attempting to write an advisory opinion.1 The merits of appellant’s petition can be disposed of without an inquiry as to standing. Thus all of the language in Section…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. Rakas v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Rawlings v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1980
  3. Steagald v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  4. Carter v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1983
  5. Combs v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1972

20 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