Druery v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• observing that it is substance of filing, not its title, that governs its treatment by reviewing court
• explaining that, although the evidence at the threshold stage supported a-finding of competency or ineompetency, because evidence of only ineompetency could be considered, weighing, competing credible evidence was error
• explaining that, although the evidence at the threshold stage supported a finding of competency or incompetency, because evidence of only incompetency could be considered, weighing competing credible evidence was error
• permitting review of both Article 46.05 competency motion and supplement to that motion, when only original motion was timely filed for purposes of twenty-day rule
• stating informal inquiry intended to determine whether issue of competency sufficiently raised such that formal hearing should be held
• permitting review of both Article 46.05 competency motion and supplement to that motion, when only original motion was timely filed for purposes of twenty-day rule

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).