Skip to main content

Samuel v. State

Citations

  • 688 S.W.2d 492
  • 1985 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1225

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that error was preserved when defendant objected to question regarding defendant was “under arrest” immediately following question about post-arrest event sufficient to put trial court on notice of appellant’s state constitutional grounds for objection
  • upholding exclusion under article 38.23 of defendant's post-arrest failure to proclaim innocence after vigilante arrest
  • objection ruled sufficient despite seeming to have been \terse and almost in the nature of an afterthought\

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Clinton, Onion, Campbell, Davis, McCormick

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

10 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.