Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Ex Parte Williams

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 11, 2001No. 73,845Published

1Concurrence

KELLER, P.J.,

filed a concurring opinion

in which HOLCOMB, J. joined.

Applicant received probation as part of a plea agreement. He challenged the validity of the plea agreement only after his probation was revoked for violating its terms. I would hold that he is estopped from doing so.

We most recently articulated the doctrine of estoppel in Pry stash v. State.1 In that ease, upon the defendant’s request, the trial court did not submit the anti-parties special issue to the jury at the punishment phase of trial.2 On appeal, the defendant contended that an answer to the issue was required, under…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Dubai Petroleum Co. v. KaziTexas Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Prystash v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1999
  3. County of Los Angeles v. FausCalifornia Supreme Court · 1957
  4. People v. HesterCalifornia Supreme Court · 2000
  5. In re GriffinCalifornia Supreme Court · 1967

7 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