Skip to main content

Russell v. State

Citations

  • 727 S.W.2d 573
  • 1987 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 560

How courts have described this case

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

  • Defendant's question to officers \whether they thought the presence of an attorney was necessary\ did not invoke right to counsel
  • Defendant’s question to officers “whether they thought the presence of an attorney was necessary” did not invoke right to counsel
  • requires the magistrate to inform an accused that any statement he made \may\ be used against him
  • requires the magistrate to inform an accused that any statement he made “may” be used against him
  • the suspect's question to the police officers \whether they thought the presence of an attorney was necessary\ did not constitute an invocation of his right to counsel
  • \appellant's inquiry into the officer's opinion as to the necessity of counsel being present during interrogation cannot be viewed as a clear invocation of his right to counsel . . . .\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Davis, Onion, Clinton, Teague, Miranda

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

21 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.