Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Castaldo v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)

Decided November 1, 2000No. 10-99-147-CRPublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTom Gray, Justice

The rules by which we are governed require “a written opinion that is as brief as practicable but ... addresses every issue ... necessary to final disposition of the appeal.” Tex.R ,App.P. 47.1 (emphasis added). Because the majority disposes of this cause on an issue which was not necessary for disposition of the appeal, and further because I disagree with the majority’s analysis of that issue, I respectfully dissent. I do, however, concur in the result reached on an issue raised that disposes of the entire appeal.

Castaldo’s second issue is:

The trial court erred in allowing the State to…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Orange Jell BeechumCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1978
  2. United States v. Juan Fidel Aleman and Rogelio Hernandez VelaCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1979
  3. United States v. Herman v. KrezdornCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  4. McKnight v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
  5. Williams v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API