Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 4/26/2006

Montanez v. State

Citations

195 S.W.3d 101
2006 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 830
2006 WL 1083917

How courts have described this case

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

holding that court of appeals applied the wrong standard of review in the context of a review of a motion to suppress
holding that “deferential standard of review ... applies to a trial court’s determination of historical facts when that determination is based on a videotape recording admitted into evidence at a suppression hearing”
holding that certification of appeal is some evidence that the trial court implicitly overruled the defendant's motion
holding that “the deferential standard of review in Guzman [v. State, 955 S.W.2d 85 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997
holding that certification of appeal is some evidence that the trial court implicitly overruled the defendant’s motion
concluding that trial judge implicitly overruled defendant’s motion to suppress even though there was no written order denying motion

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keasler, Price, Hervey, Holcomb, Cochran, Keller, Meyers, Womack, Johnson

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

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

Other cases named Montanez v. State

25 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.