Legal Opinion
State v. Mendel
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided February 17, 1994No. B14-92-01283-CR, C14-92-01284-CRPublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SEARS, Justice.
These are appeals from the dismissal of two separate indictments alleging each appel-lee committed the offenses of keeping a gambling place and possessing a gambling device. TexPenal Code Ann. §§ 47.04, 47.06 (Vernon 1989). After a hearing, the trial court found that the statutes defining these offenses, as well as section 47.01(3), which defines “gambling device,” are unconstitutionally vague, both as written and as applied to the devices possessed by appellees. The state now appeals the orders dismissing the indictments, raising a single point of error. See Tex.Code…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Grayned v. City of RockfordSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Papachristou v. City of JacksonvilleSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Ex Parte GranvielCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
- Bynum v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Webb v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1999
- State v. Wofford, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
- Owens v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2000
- Sullivan v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1999
- Weyandt v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.