Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Patterson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 22, 1974No. 47750Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partRoberts, Judge

Appellant urges this Court to reconsider his ground of error # 1, relating to testimony received concerning an oral confession made by the appellant. I have done so and conclude that the Court erred in its disposition of this ground. The reliance by the majority on original submission upon Art. 38.24, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., was misplaced and totally ignores the rule of law as properly announced in the unanimous decision of this Court in Roman v. State, 503 S.W.2d 252 (Tex.Cr.App.1974). As was stated in the original majority opinion, the controversy centers around the following colloquy, which…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Roman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  2. Sanders v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1970

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

Powered by the Exa API