Yvanez v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• explaining that trial court had discretion to stack sentences for any excepted offenses listed in section 3.03 but did not have discretion to stack sentences for offenses not encompassed in section 3.03
• explaining that trial court had discretion to stack sentences for any excepted offenses listed in section 3.03 but did not have discretion to stack sentences for offenses not encompassed in section 3.03
• because a sentence for intoxication manslaughter could not be ordered to run consecutively to one for intoxication assault, the court reformed the judgment to declare that it only run consecutively to the other intoxication manslaughter convictions
• because a sentence for intoxication manslaughter could not be ordered to run consecutively to one for intoxication assault, the court reformed the judgment to declare that it only run consecutively to the other intoxication manslaughter convictions
• because a sentence for intoxication manslaughter could not be ordered to run consecutively to one for intoxication assault, the court reformed the judgment to declare that it only run consecutively to the other intoxication manslaughter convictions
• because a sentence for intoxication manslaughter could not be ordered to run consecutively to one for intoxication assault, the court reformed the judgment to declare that it only run consecutively to the other intoxication manslaughter convictions

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).