Legal Opinion

Oguntope v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)

Decided May 5, 2005No. 01-04-00205-CRPublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JANE BLAND, Justice.

Appellant Samuel Oguntope waived his right against self-incrimination, his right to trial by jury, and his right to confrontation. He judicially confessed to the State’s allegations that he committed the misdemeanor offense of driving while intoxicated (“DWI”). After finding true an enhancement paragraph alleging a prior felony, the trial court assessed punishment at ten days’ confinement, suspended his driver’s license for one year, and entered an order requiring Oguntope to install an ignition interlock restriction device in his vehicle. 1

Before entering his plea…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Guzman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1997
  2. Carmouche v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  3. Rogers v. RichmondSupreme Court of the United States · 1961
  4. Thomas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  5. Erdman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993

5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Arthur v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2007
  2. Berrick Milton Blackwell v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2025
  3. Hilary Arthur v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2007
  4. Hilary Arthur v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2007
  5. Julie Ann Jordan v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth)2006

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API