Legal Opinion · Dissent

Bawcom v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 20, 2000No. 01-99-01397-CRPublished

1DissentTim Taft, Justice

I agree with the majority opinion that the State did not exercise due diligence in apprehending appellant, but I disagree that the analysis ends with that determination. The majority opinion does not consider a venerable Court of Criminal Appeals opinion excusing any lack of diligence when, as here, the probationer had changed residence without notifying his probation officer. Indeed, an analysis of the cases reversed for lack of due diligence reveals that the probationers’ whereabouts were known, but the State failed to apprehend them. Therefore, I respectfully dissent for the reasons more…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Rodriguez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
  2. Langston v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
  3. Strickland v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1975
  4. Burch v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)1991
  5. Sessions v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 8th District (El Paso)1997

2 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