Tex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 10/4/2001
Campbell v. State
Citations
- 68 S.W.3d 747
- 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 6672
- 2001 WL 1168849
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- noting that challenged commitment order expired during appeal but was replaced by new commitment order for appellant who was acquitted by reason of insanity
- aff'd. 85 S.W.3d 176, 184-185 (Tex. 2002)
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Yates, Fowler, Wittig
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
21 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Campbell v. StateTexas Supreme Court· 2002-08-29· cited 79×
- Campbell v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2004-04-12· cited 41×
- In Re F.M.Tex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2005-12-22· cited 31×
- Campbell v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2003-07-31· cited 30×
- Evans v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2004-03-18· cited 25×
- In Re the Guardianship of KellerTex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2005-07-27· cited 21×
- Candelario Marroquin v. StateTex. App. Ct., 8th Dist. (El Paso)· 2003-07-31· cited 14×
- Martin v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2007-03-01· cited 6×
- Rodriquez v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 2017-05-02· cited 6×
- In Re FMTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2005-12-22
- Weinstein, Christopher Thomas v. StateTex. App. Ct., 8th Dist. (El Paso)· 2003-05-22
- C. J. Hatten and Craig Hatten v. University Interscholastic League and William Farney, Executive DirectorTex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2007-09-27
- Campbell, Nathan Dale v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2003-07-31
- in Re: Leon EvansTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2004-03-18
- Martin, Robert Louis v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2005-10-27
- Robert Louis Martin v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2007-03-01
- Elliott Nathaniel Guerrero v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2008-04-22
- Opinion No.Texas Attorney General Reports· 2011-08-12
- Carolyn Barnes v. StateTex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2016-07-13
- in the Interest of A.E., a ChildTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2019-10-01
Cites
30 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court· 1984-06-25· cited 123,578×
- Thompson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1999-10-13· cited 6,146×
- Sibron v. New YorkSupreme Court· 1968-06-10· cited 4,326×
- Hernandez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1986-09-17· cited 3,060×
- Addington v. TexasSupreme Court· 1979-04-30· cited 3,004×
- Jackson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1994-06-01· cited 2,561×
- Vitek v. JonesSupreme Court· 1980-03-25· cited 1,747×
- Tong v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2000-09-20· cited 1,364×
- Parham v. J. R.Supreme Court· 1979-06-20· cited 1,078×
- Rhoades v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1996-10-02· cited 959×
- Humphrey v. CadySupreme Court· 1972-03-22· cited 784×
- Pollard v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1957-02-25· cited 744×
- Lawton v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1996-01-17· cited 507×
- GENERAL LAND OFFICE OF THE STATE OF TEX. v. Oxy USA, Inc.Texas Supreme Court· 1990-05-16· cited 354×
- Ex Parte FeltonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1991-09-18· cited 302×
- State v. LodgeTexas Supreme Court· 1980-11-26· cited 169×
- Carrillo v. StateTexas Supreme Court· 1972-05-24· cited 130×
- Hicks v. StateTex. App. Ct., 14th Dist. (Houston)· 2000-04-27· cited 123×
- Spangler v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory ServicesTex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 1998-02-04· cited 102×
- Leal v. Texas Department of Protective & Regulatory ServicesTex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 2000-07-27· cited 102×
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.