Aguilar v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[A]n intention to be ceremonially married on some future occasion does not necessarily negate the inference that the parties believe they are already married by common law.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Johnson v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1991-02-13· cited 621×
• Tompkins v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1987-10-07· cited 307×
• McDuffie v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 9th Dist. (Beaumont)· 1993-09-22· cited 32×
• Love v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1987-04-29· cited 23×
• Reece v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1989-05-04· cited 18×
• Villarreal v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1986-08-29· cited 2×
• Jassen Barnes v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2014-12-10
• Rodriguez, Jose Antonio v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2002-08-22
• Barnes, Jassen
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 2015-01-16
• in Re: Roger Arash Farahmand
  Tex. App. Ct., 5th Dist. (Dallas)· 2015-07-16
• Luis Enrique Rodriguez v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 8th Dist. (El Paso)· 2018-07-11
• Deisy Umana v. Jose O. Rodriguez-Ramos
  Tex. App. Ct., 5th Dist. (Dallas)· 2021-06-21
• Turner v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1987-03-11
• City of Euless, Self-Insured v. Marta Danylyk, Helmut Hofer, Sofija Hofer and the Texas Subsequent Injury Fund
  Tex. App. Ct., 5th Dist. (Dallas)· 2023-12-12