Skip to main content

Phillips v. State

Citations

  • 161 S.W.3d 511
  • 2005 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 701
  • 2005 WL 957274

How courts have described this case

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

  • reasoning that article 38.23 was not implicated because no laws were violated and concluding that trial judge did not err in denying motion to suppress; court did not reach issue about whether violation of criminal-trespass statute invoked article 38.23
  • reasoning that article 38.23 was not implicated because no laws were violated and concluding that trial judge did not err in denying motion to suppress; court did not reach issue about whether violation of criminal-trespass statute invoked article 38.23
  • because no laws were violated, article 38.23 was not implicated and trial judge did not err in denying motion to suppress; court did not reach issue of whether violation of criminal trespass statute invokes article 38.23
  • because no laws were violated, article 38.23 was not implicated and trial judge did not err in denying motion to suppress; court did not reach issue of whether violation of criminal trespass statute invokes article 38.23

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

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

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.