Legal Opinion
Jamail v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Decided March 21, 1990No. 768-87PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON THE APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
PER CURIAM. 1
The appellant was convicted of driving while intoxicated following his plea of nolo contendere, which was based upon a negotiated plea bargain made pursuant to and in compliance with Article 44.02, V.A.C.C.P. The trial court assessed appellant’s punishment at 120 days confinement, probated for two years, and a monetary fine of $300.00. The First Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, holding that the trial court correctly denied the appellant’s motion to suppress evidence. Jamail v. State, 731 S.W.2d 708…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Doyle v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Baxter v. PalmigianoSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Jenkins v. AndersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- South Dakota v. NevilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Griffith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
- Hardie v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Dumas v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1991
- Cornealius v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
- Blondett v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1996
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.