Tex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2/3/1993
State v. Hernandez
Citations
- 842 S.W.2d 306
- 1992 WL 207640
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- creation of an agency between law enforcement and non-law enforcement personnel depends upon the existence of an agreement between them at the time of the elicitation
- creation of an agency between law enforcement and non-law enforcement personnel depends upon the existence of an agreement between them at the time of the elicitation
- creation of an agency between law enforcement and non-law enforcement personnel depends upon the existence of an agreement between them at the time of the elicitation
- “It appears clear that in examining the Massiah[ 20 ] line of cases that to find a Sixth Amendment violation,. the statements in question must have been (1) ‘deliberately elicited’ (2) by a ‘government agent.’ ”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Butts, Chapa, Onion
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
28 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Escamilla v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 2004-06-30· cited 453×
- Goldberg v. StateTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2002-08-22· cited 170×
- Green v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1994-01-12· cited 127×
- Dotson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 2004-09-02· cited 119×
- State of Tennessee v. Howard Hawk WillisTennessee Supreme Court· 2016-07-06· cited 112×
- Hargrove v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 2005-02-17· cited 69×
- Kimball Douglas Hailey II v. StateTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2012-10-18· cited 56×
- Adams v. StateTex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2005-12-08· cited 36×
- Penley v. StateTex. App. Ct., 6th Dist. (Texarkana)· 1999-08-23· cited 32×
- Edwards v. StateTex. App. Ct., 6th Dist. (Texarkana)· 1997-10-24· cited 14×
- Flores v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 2001-05-04· cited 13×
- Hernandez v. StateTex. App. Ct., 4th Dist. (San Antonio)· 1994-12-21· cited 6×
- Watson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas· 1994-09-14· cited 2×
- Goldberg, Dror Haim v. StateTex. App. Ct., 1st Dist. (Houston)· 2002-08-22
- Tommy Eugene Dotson v. StateTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2004-09-02
- Jody Q. Hargrove v. StateTex. App. Ct., 2nd Dist. (Fort Worth)· 2005-02-17
- Jeffrey Leo Leggett v. StateTex. App. Ct., 3rd Dist. (Austin)· 1993-11-03
- Joe Edward LaRue v. StateTex. App. Ct., 9th Dist. (Beaumont)· 2007-05-23
- Alma Guadalupe Quintanilla v. StateTex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2000-03-23
- Megan Mae Adams v. StateTex. App. Ct., 13th Dist.· 2005-12-08
Cites
71 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Miranda v. ArizonaSupreme Court· 1966-06-13· cited 58,288×
- Rhode Island v. InnisSupreme Court· 1980-05-12· cited 5,571×
- Powell v. AlabamaSupreme Court· 1932-11-07· cited 4,979×
- Moran v. BurbineSupreme Court· 1986-03-10· cited 3,339×
- Massiah v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1964-05-18· cited 3,189×
- Kirby v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1972-06-07· cited 3,001×
- Brewer v. WilliamsSupreme Court· 1977-05-16· cited 2,626×
- Estelle v. SmithSupreme Court· 1981-05-18· cited 2,053×
- McNeil v. WisconsinSupreme Court· 1991-06-13· cited 1,818×
- Michigan v. JacksonSupreme Court· 1986-04-01· cited 1,418×
- Maine v. MoultonSupreme Court· 1985-12-10· cited 1,260×
- Kuhlmann v. WilsonSupreme Court· 1986-06-26· cited 1,205×
- United States v. GouveiaSupreme Court· 1984-05-29· cited 1,098×
- United States v. HenrySupreme Court· 1980-06-16· cited 1,013×
- Patterson v. IllinoisSupreme Court· 1988-06-24· cited 1,013×
- Illinois v. PerkinsSupreme Court· 1990-06-04· cited 906×
- Michigan v. HarveySupreme Court· 1990-04-30· cited 701×
- Fuller v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1992-03-25· cited 484×
- DeBlanc v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1990-11-28· cited 288×
- Lucas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas· 1989-03-22· cited 200×
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.