Legal Opinion
Heredia v. State
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Decided October 29, 1975No. 50315PublishedCited by 104 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ODOM, Judge.
Appellant was convicted of burglary; punishment, enhanced under Article 63, V.A.P.C., was assessed at life.
The sufficiency of the evidence is not challenged.
In his first ground of error, appellant asserts:
“The trial court committed reversible error in overruling Defendant’s Motion to Suppress Evidence in finding Defendant gave effective consent to search when without having been apprised of any rights whatsoever, Defendant, if he did consent, did so only after he had been accused of a criminal offense.”
The record reflects that appellant, while driving an automobile, was…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Schneckloth v. BustamonteSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Edwards v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1968
- Taylor v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1967
- Powell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1973
- Grizzell v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1956
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by104 opinions
- Rose v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
- Sneed v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
- Dugard v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
- Carrillo v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
- White v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
99 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.