Legal Opinion

Deifik v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided September 14, 2001No. 2-00-443-CRPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION ON THE STATE’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

SUE WALKER, Justice.

INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 50, we withdraw our July 19, 2001 opinion issued in this cause and substitute this opinion. TexRApp. P. 50. We rewrite on the State’s Petition for Discretionary Review to clarify that we exercjse direct jurisdiction over this appeal.

The primary issue in this appeal is whether this court possesses jurisdiction over appellant Todd Alan Deifik’s (“Dei-fik”) appeal. We conclude that we do have jurisdiction. Because Deifik and the State agree that the trial court’s…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Manuel v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
  2. Nix v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
  3. Ex Parte SeidelCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001
  4. Ex Parte MorrisCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1982
  5. Ex Parte BusbyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. State v. Melanie Dawn Fielder, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2011
  2. Christopher Nathan Fodor v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2023
  3. James Curtis Manning v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)2022
  4. Jose Gregory Moore v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2008
  5. Kathie Meadows Spears v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)2015

8 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