Jones v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION ON STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
WHITE, Judge.
In Miffleton v. State, 777 S.W.2d 76 (Tex.Cr.App.1989), we made it clear that compelling a DWI suspect to perform sobriety tests on videotape did not call for testimonial responses and therefore offended neither the United States nor the Texas Constitutions. This holding applied only to the visual part of the recording; we failed to reach the admissibility of defendant’s statements on the accompanying soundtrack which were made after defendant invoked his Miranda right to counsel. In this case, we hold the police questioning…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited26 opinions
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- United States v. WadeSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Schmerber v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by193 opinions
- Griffith v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
- Roquemore v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
- Mann v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
- Alford, Cecil EdwardCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2012
- Morris v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1995
188 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.