Skip to main content

David Cary v. State

Citations

  • 460 S.W.3d 731
  • 2015 Tex. App. LEXIS 2816
  • 2015 WL 1346126

How courts have described this case

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

  • showing that the lower court focused almost exclusively on the manner in which the “benefit” to Wooten was eventually used, and not on the evidence supporting the jury’s inference that Appellee did not intend specific use of that benefit
  • “We only address appellant’s first three issues because our resolution of those issues is dispositive of this appeal.”
  • no mention of evidence supporting the jury’s inference that Appellee had no specific intent for campaign use
  • “the parties agree that the records in both cases are nearly identical[.]”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Bridges, Lang-Miers, Myers

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

7 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

5 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

Other cases named David Cary v. State

14 other CourtListener records share this case 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.