Skip to main content

Bridges v. State

Citations

  • 909 S.W.2d 151
  • 1995 Tex. App. LEXIS 2250
  • 1995 WL 546961

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[T]he informer’s potential testimony must be shown to significantly aid appellant, and mere conjecture or supposition about possible relevance is insufficient.”
  • “[T]he informer’s potential testimony must be shown to significantly aid appellant, and mere conjecture or supposition about possible relevance is insufficient” to overcome the State’s assertion of privilege

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Murphy, Anderson, Hudson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

18 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.