Bailey v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• facts determined whether document qualified as security, so jury should have heard expert testimony on “context, substance, and reality surrounding the sale”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Bailey
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2006-09-20· cited 45×
• Texas State Securities Board and Denise Voigt Crawford v. Paul Miller and ATM Management, Inc.
  Tex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2009-07-01
• Bailey, Cameron O.
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2006-09-20
• William C. Mays v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2016-04-28
• William C. Mays v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2015-09-24

Cites

8 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Almanza v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1985-02-27· cited 6,557×
• Securities and Exchange Commission v. W. J. Howey Co.
  Supreme Court· 1946-10-14· cited 1,616×
• Abdnor v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1994-01-26· cited 1,398×
• Tcherepnin v. Knight
  Supreme Court· 1967-12-18· cited 878×
• Reves v. Ernst & Young
  Supreme Court· 1990-04-16· cited 433×
• Marine Bank v. Weaver
  Supreme Court· 1982-03-08· cited 331×
• Gamez v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1987-09-23· cited 257×
• Bruner v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1970-09-23· cited 23×