Legal Opinion · Concurrence

State v. Scheineman

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided June 12, 2002No. 1196-01Published

1Concurrence

MEYERS, J.,

filed a concurring opinion, joined by PRICE, J.

OPINION

I join the majority’s result and I generally agree with the majority’s recital of applicable law. See State v. Scheineman, No. 1196-01, slip op.. (Tex.Crim.App. June 12, 2002) (hereinafter cited as “Majority Op.”). However, I do not join the majority opinion to the extent that the holding goes beyond that which is necessary to decide this appeal.

In this case, the court of appeals recognized that people do not ordinarily have an expectation of privacy in an instrumentality controlled by law enforcement.1 State v. Scheineman, 47…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. North v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court · 1972
  2. State v. CalhounDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  3. State v. Scheineman, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2001
  4. State v. TrevinoCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2001

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

Powered by the Exa API