Holdridge v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• only “affirmative and conclusive proof in the record that the venue of prosecution was improperly laid” avoids presumption
• only \affirmative and conclusive proof in the record that the venue of prosecution was improperly laid\ avoids presumption
• only “affirmative and conclusive proof in the record that the venue of prosecution was improperly laid” avoids presumption

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

5 cases in this archive cite this case.

• O'Hara v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1992-03-25· cited 177×
• Newton v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2009-01-14· cited 6×
• Dill v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1995-03-23· cited 4×
• Patrick S. O'Hara v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 1992-01-29
• Bobby Blake Newton v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2007-06-13

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Barfield v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1979-09-19· cited 270×
• Canada v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1983-10-05· cited 52×
• Rushing v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1977-02-09· cited 11×