Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

678 S.W.2d 82

Sheffield v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1984-07-18

Relies on Ex Parte Crisp · Sheffield v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1984-07-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Cannon v. State (1985), Juarez v. State (2010)

25 state decisions

1101984199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1APPELLANT’S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

PER CURIAM.

¶2We agree with the Court of Appeals that appellant’s conviction should be reversed. Ex parte Crisp, 661 S.W.2d 944 (Tex.Cr.App.1983). Accordingly, appellant’s petition for discretionary review will be refused. As is true in every case, refusal of discretionary review by this Court does not constitute an endorsement or adoption of the reasoning employed by the Court of Appeals in its opinion. Sheffield v. State, 650 S.W.2d 813 (Tex.Cr.App.1983).

¶3Appellant’s petition for discretionary review is refused.

/678/sw2d/82 · .json · Public domain