Skip to main content

Smith v. State

Citations

  • 290 S.W.3d 368
  • 2009 Tex. App. LEXIS 3275
  • 2009 WL 1312953

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that argument had concluded for purposes of article 36.02 because “both sides had rested, closed, and delivered closing arguments” and thus trial court abused its discretion in reopening proceeding to allow testimony after argument had concluded (emphasis added)
  • modifying order of adjudication to include trial court's oral pronouncement that defendant violated six conditions of his deferred adjudication
  • discussing test for abuse of discretion generally

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: William J. Boyce

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

36 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.