Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 5/13/2015

In re Allen

Citations

462 S.W.3d 47
2015 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 592
2015 WL 2265128

How courts have described this case

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

holding that mandamus would not lie where a previous opinion from this Court “at a minimum, muddies the waters” so that the right to relief was not clear
holding that mandamus would not lie where a previous opinion from this Court “at a minimum, muddies 'the waters” so that the right to relief was not clear
observing that Art. 36.13 has been cited to support “the common notion that a jury decides facts, and the court applies the law to the facts.”
observing that “[t]his ease, like all- mandamus cases, must be decided on the existing law alone”; “a mandamus proceeding is not the appropriate place to interpret statutory language”
observing that a mandamus case “must be decided on the existing law alone” and is not an appropriate vehicle to “interpret statutory language, clarify this Court’s precedent, or create law where there is none”
denying mandamus relief to the State, and holding that a defendant’s request for a pretrial determination of intellectual disability “does not call for the execution of a ministerial act”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Alcala, Hervey, Johnson, Keasler, Keller, Meyers, Newell, Richardson, Yeary

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

34 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this 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.