Skip to main content

Schultz v. State

Citations

  • 923 S.W.2d 1
  • 1996 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 44
  • 1996 WL 180701

How courts have described this case

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

  • concluding that “evidence and inferences permitted to be drawn from it” supported defendant’s child-abandonment conviction
  • explaining that offense of abandoning or endangering a child can dispense with requirement of awareness of danger because person subject to that offense has already assumed a duty to act reasonably, and it is the neglect of this duty that is criminalized
  • explaining that offense of abandoning or endangering a child can dispense with requirement of awareness of danger because person subject to that offense has already assumed a duty to act reasonably, and it is the neglect of this duty that is criminalized
  • explaining that offense of abandoning or endangering a child can dispense with requirement of awareness of danger because person subject to that offense has already assumed a duty to act reasonably, and it is the neglect of this duty that is crim i nalized
  • construing the child- abandonment statute at Texas Penal Code Section 22.041(b
  • “As a concurring opinion, Lugo-Lugo [650 S.W.2d 72, 87 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983) (Clinton, J. concurring)] is not binding precedent.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Baird, Clinton, Keller, Mansfield, Meyers, Overstreet

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

12 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.