Skip to main content

Stewart v. State

Citations

  • 240 S.W.3d 872
  • 2007 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1475
  • 2007 WL 3171640

How courts have described this case

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

  • stating that a “person acts intentionally, or with intent, [when] it is his conscious objective or desire to ... cause the result”
  • stating that a “person acts 10 intentionally, or with intent, [when] it is his conscious objective or desire to . . . cause the result”
  • explaining that statute “requires intent as to a particular result, namely, impairing a thing’s availability as evidence”
  • stating that a “person acts intentionally, or with intent, [when] it is his conscious objective or desire to . . . cause the result”
  • overturning tampering with evidence prosecution because, even if the defendant knew that his action would impair the availability of marijuana as evidence, the prosecution had not shown that he intended to impair its availability
  • overturning tampering with evidence prosecution because, even if the defendant knew that his action would impair the availability of marijuana as evidence, the prosecution had not shown that he intended to impair its availability

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keller, Meyers, Hervey, Holcomb, Cochran, Womack, Price, Johnson, Keasler

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

1 case in this archive is 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.