Legal Opinion
Fant v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas
Decided October 12, 1994No. A14-94-00013-CRPublishedCited by 35 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MAJORITY OPINION
MURPHY, Justice.
In this appeal from the trial court’s denial of appellant’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, we consider whether double jeopardy bars appellant’s trial for possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, after the State has obtained a forfeiture judgment arising out of the same criminal occurrence. We conclude that it does.
Appellant was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver in cause No. 656,133. Three days later, the State initiated forfeiture proceedings against him in the 55th District Court…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Austin v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Department of Revenue of Mont. v. Kurth RanchSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
- United States v. WardSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by35 opinions
- State v. Lara, Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District1996
- Pine v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1994
- Ex Parte Arnold, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)1996
- Madison v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 6th District (Texarkana)1996
- Aravanis v. Somerset CountyCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1995
30 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.