Legal Opinion

Watkins v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided November 6, 1987No. 05-87-00157-CRPublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BAKER, Justice.

After conviction for driving while intoxicated, Michael Lee Watkins is before this Court contending, in six points of error, that he is entitled to a reversal. We disagree and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

This is the case of the peripatetic pronoun “his.” This case, insofar as appellant views it, depends upon where he chooses to locate that pronoun. It is a will-of-the-wisp; darting here and there in the statute —the information — and the charge — appearing as the occasion arises to suit appellant’s purposes in this appeal. We choose to ascribe a more sedentary character…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Almanza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
  2. Wicker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
  3. Ex Parte GranvielCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
  4. American Plant Food Corporation v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  5. Cotton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985

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

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. Dumas v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1991
  2. Murphy v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2001
  3. Massie v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1988
  4. Lancaster v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 12th District (Tyler)1988
  5. State v. CarterCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1989

13 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