Legal Opinion

Anderson v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided November 18, 2009No. PD-1441-08PublishedCited by 318 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

OPINION

2Opinion of the Court · KeaslerKeasler, J.

Before trial, David Lee Anderson made an unsworn oral motion for a continuance so that he would have time to mount a defense against the State’s DNA test results. The judge denied the motion, and Anderson pled guilty and appealed the judge’s denial of the motion. The Corpus Christi Court of Appeals held that Anderson’s claim was preserved because there is a “due process exception” to the rule that an unsworn oral motion for a continuance preserves nothing for review. 1 We conclude that the court’s preservation analysis was flawed and that the right at issue — a meaningful opportunity…

3Cases cited27 opinions

  1. Crane v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  2. Taylor v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
  3. Marin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
  4. Mendez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004
  5. Montanez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2006

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

4Cited by318 opinions

  1. Davis v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2010
  2. Grado, Michael AnthonyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2014
  3. Blackshear, George EdwardCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2012
  4. Trent Mason v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)2013
  5. EX PARTE Eric Michael HEILMAN, AppelleeCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2015

313 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