Alford, Melinda

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that conclusions of law are reviewed de novo so that trial court’s order is upheld under any legal theory supported by the facts
• holding that conclusions of law are reviewed de novo so that trial court’s order is upheld under any legal theory supported by the facts
• holding that conclusions of law are reviewed de novo so that trial court’s order is upheld under any legal theory supported by the facts
• recognizing that the procedural-default rules in Article 33.1(a) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure do not apply to the prevailing party regarding a motion to suppress
• noting that an appellant may not raise an argument for the first time on appeal if it would serve as a basis for reversing the trial court’s ruling on a motion to suppress
• conclusions of law are reviewed de novo so that trial court’s order is upheld under any legal theory supported by the facts

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).