Skip to main content

Cross v. State

Citations

  • 144 S.W.3d 521
  • 2004 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1473
  • 2004 WL 2109239

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that administrative questions do not constitute “interrogation” because they are not normally expected to elicit incriminating responses
  • noting that invocation of right to counsel insulates defendant from further police-initiated interrogation but that defendant may initiate communication with police following invocation of right

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Cochran, Keller, Meyers, Price, Womack, Johnson, Hervey, Holcomb, Keasler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

17 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named Cross v. State

133 other CourtListener records share this case name; the 50 most cited are listed.

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.