Skip to main content

Brooks v. State

Citations

  • 957 S.W.2d 30
  • 1997 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 94
  • 1997 WL 730752

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that enhancement allegations do not need to be contained within the body of the primary charging document
  • concluding that indictment is merely State's primary pleading in criminal action and certain matters, such as enhancements, may be plead apart from indictment
  • holding that enhancement allegations do not need to be specified in the indictment, provided that the defendant received other forms of notice
  • holding that enhancement allegations do not need to be contained within the body of the primary charging document
  • holding that enhancement allegations do not need to be contained within the body of the primary charging document
  • recognizing that although defendant has due process right to notice of State’s pursuit of enhancement, State need not amend indictment provided that convictions used as enhancement are pleaded in some form

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keller, McCormick, Mansfield, Price, Holland, Womack, Meyers, Baird, Overstreet

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

253 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

27 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

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.