Legal Opinion
State v. Cox
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided August 23, 2007No. 2-06-171-CRPublishedCited by 46 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
JOHN CAYCE, Chief Justice.
The State is attempting to appeal the trial court’s ruling granting Matthew Neal Cox’s motion to suppress. The primary issue we must decide is whether a docket sheet entry reflecting the trial court’s oral ruling on Cox’s motion to suppress constitutes a signed written order for purposes of appeal. Because we conclude that it does not, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.
On April 4, 2006, after a hearing on Cox’s motion to suppress, the trial court orally granted the motion and made a handwritten entry on the docket sheet reciting “motion to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- In Re Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaTexas Supreme Court · 2004
- Rodarte v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
- State v. RosenbaumCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- State Ex Rel. Sutton v. BageCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1992
- State v. GarzaCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by46 opinions
- State of Texas v. Sanavongxay, SoutchayCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2012
- Bracken v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2009
- State v. Miguel Martinez, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District2018
- Richardson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2013
- State v. Sanavongxay, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2010
41 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.