Brick v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that appeals court erred in declining to consider whether consent was tainted by potentially illegal police activity
• holding that the court of appeals erred in declining to consider whether the arrest was illegal and whether the consent was tainted by the potentially illegal police activity
• noting that article 38.23 and the federal exclusionary rule share a common purpose: \to deter unlawful conduct on the part of law enforcement personnel and to close the doors of our courts to illegally obtained evidence\
• holding a consensual search may produce admissible evidence if the consent was not obtained by exploitation of an illegal arrest
• holding court of appeals erred in declining to consider whether arrest was illegal and whether consent was tainted by potentially illegal police activity
• holding that the burden is on the State

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).