In the Interest of L. S. R. and C. W. R., Children v. the State of Texas

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that a warrant authorizing seizure of any item on a cell phone that might later serve as circumstantial evidence of a crime is tantamount to a general warrant
• concluding that a warrant authorizing seizure of any item on a cell phone that might later serve as circumstantial evidence of a crime is tantamount to a general warrant
• finding reversible error where the trial court erred by instructing the jury on self-defense from the victim’s perspective without proper factual predi- cates present
• A “search command broad enough to permit the use of any material discovered on the cell phone relevant to establish the device owner or user’s identity is impermissibly nonspecific.” (Emphasis in original.)
• cit- ing the Supreme Court’s caution in Mansor, 363 Or at 213, that a warrant’s command to find “evidence of a particular crime” does not create specificity sufficient to pass constitu- tional muster
• A “search command broad enough to permit the use of any material discovered on the cell phone relevant to establish the device owner or user’s identity is impermissibly nonspecific.” (Emphasis in original.)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).