Legal Opinion

Medford v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)

Decided February 11, 1999No. 03-97-00769-CRPublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BEA ANN SMITH, Justice.

Appellant Billy Doyle Medford appeals from the trial court’s denial of his motion to suppress evidence and his subsequent conviction for the offenses of felony escape and possession of cocaine in an amount less than one gram. See Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 38.06(a)(1), (c)(1) (West 1994); Tex. Health & Safety Code Ann. § 481.112(a), (b) (West Supp.1998). The jury found that appellant had five prior felony convictions as alleged in the enhancement paragraphs of the indictment. Pursuant to the habitual felony offender statute, 1 the jury assessed punishment for the cocaine…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Jackson v. VirginiaSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Terry v. OhioSupreme Court of the United States · 1968
  3. Almanza v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1985
  4. Guzman v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1997
  5. United States v. MendenhallSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

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

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Medford v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  2. Medford v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
  3. Billy Doyle Medford v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District (Austin)2000
  4. Henry Marsh Diggs v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 10th District (Waco)2008
  5. Kyler Patrick Koch v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)2025

2 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