Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

322 S.W.3d 685

Dahlem v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Decided July 15, 2010

This page is marked noindex.

Court of Appeals of Texas · decided 2010-07-15

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently January 2016

5 state decisions

Relies on State v. Cox

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2010-07-15

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

LEE ANN DAUPHINOT, Justice,

¶1concurring.

¶2In State v. Cox, a majority of this court held an oral ruling on the record detailing findings of fact and conclusions of law and a docket entry signed by the trial judge and granting a motion to suppress insufficient to trigger a State’s appeal under article 44.01 of the code of criminal procedure and dismissed the appeal.1 To remain consistent, we should hold here that the docket entry initialed by the trial judge and denying a motion to suppress, with no oral ruling on the record and no findings of fact or conclusions of law, is likewise insufficient to preserve Appellant’s complaint.

¶3Because the majority instead resolves the appeal on its merits, I respectfully concur.

¶4. State v. Cox, 235 S.W.3d 283, 283, 285 (Tex.App.-Fort Worth 2007, no pet.) (en banc majority op.).

/322/sw3d/685 · .json · Public domain