Andres Enrique Bonilla v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• noting that “the protections provided by an indictment were not compromised” when, although not included in the charging language, the drug quantity was included in the description of overt acts
• rejecting appellant’s claim under Olano’s third prong because he received sufficient notice

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).