Skip to main content

Neal v. State

Citations

  • 150 S.W.3d 169
  • 2004 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1976
  • 2004 WL 2601067

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that due process claim not preserved because appellant failed to raise claim in trial court
  • holding that defendant failed to preserve issue of vindictive prosecution without addressing the merits of the argument
  • concluding that due process claim not preserved because appellant failed to raise claim before trial court
  • concluding that due process claim not preserved because appellant failed to raise claim before trial court
  • holding that defendant failed to preserve issue of vindictive prosecution without addressing the merits of the argument
  • holding prosecutorial vindictiveness claim not preserved for appellate review because appellant never presented claim to trial court

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

27 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.