Montes v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• examination would not have benefitted the appellant, because no heroin was left after the analysis

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

9 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Arthur v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama· 1996-03-08· cited 110×
• Pena v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 10th Dist. (Waco)· 2007-05-02· cited 95×
• Mendoza v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1979-04-18· cited 40×
• Page v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1976-02-04· cited 35×
• Scott v. State
  Tex. App. Ct., 5th Dist. (Dallas)· 1992-02-20· cited 17×
• Dullnig v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1974-01-23· cited 7×
• Ex Parte Johnson
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1983-05-18· cited 7×
• Martinez v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1982-09-08· cited 3×
• Richardson v. State
  Court of Appeals of Texas· 1993-09-29

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Ex Parte Giles
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1973-12-05· cited 138×
• Detmering v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1972-06-28· cited 32×
• Dagley v. State
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1965-06-23· cited 25×