Brimage v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMiller, Judge
I agree that the search and seizure conducted by the police at Appellant’s home violated his constitutional rights. However, the plurality further holds that the evidence was sufficient to support Appellant’s capital murder conviction based on kidnapping, under their interpretation of § 20.03 of the Texas Penal Code. Because I cannot agree with the plurality’s construction of the Texas kidnapping statute, I am compelled to dissent.
I
Based upon a convoluted and strained reading of Penal Code § 20.03, the plurality holds that no significant degree of movement is required to support the offense…
2Cases cited50 opinions
- Gregg v. GeorgiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Jurek v. TexasSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Boykin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Greene v. MasseySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Webb v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Brimage v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996