Source: https://www.tdcaa.com/journal/a-compendium-of-bite-size-legal-tips-2/
Timestamp: 2019-04-21 12:49:36+00:00

Document:
1 Ex parte Langley, 833 S.W.2d 141, 143 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); see Ex parte White, 211 S.W.3d 316, 319 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (“As we have long held, ‘[i]t is well-settled that a probated sentence is not a final conviction for enhancement purposes unless it is revoked’”) (quoting Langley, 833 S.W.2d at 143).
2 See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Art. 42.12, §6(a) (a trial court may, within 180 days of the date that the execution of the sentence actually begins, place the defendant on shock community supervision if the judge determines that the defendant would not benefit from further incarceration, “the defendant is otherwise eligible for community supervision under this article,” and the defendant has never been incarcerated in prison for a felony sentence); State v. Dunbar, 297 S.W.3d 777, 780 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009).
3 Meekins v. State, 340 S.W.3d 454, 470 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); see Valtierra v. State, 310 S.W.3d 442, 451–52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2010) (consent to enter defendant’s apartment and speak with a suspected runaway in bathroom was sufficient, when combined with other facts, to support voluntary implied consent to walk down the apartment hallway); Johnson v. State, 226 S.W.3d 439, 440–41 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (calling 911 and asking for police assistance constituted implied consent for police to enter defendant’s home and investigate a homicide); Gallups v. State, 151 S.W.3d 196, 201 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004) (defendant’s hand gesture made towards officer was sufficient to convey consent for the officer to enter defendant’s home); Thomas v. State, 297 S.W.3d 458, 463-64 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2009, pet. ref’d) (defendant voluntarily consented to the search of his pockets when he put his hands up, pushed his hip towards the officer, and “invit[ed] her to ‘look.’”); Kendrick v. State, 93 S.W.3d 230, 234 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2002, pet. ref’d) (defendant consented to a pat-down search when he stood up and raised his hands); Simpson v. State, 29 S.W.3d 324, 329 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2000, pet. ref’d) (defendant consented to the search of his car when he nodded his head affirmatively, despite his subsequent testimony that he did not give consent).
4 Meekins v. State, 340 S.W.3d 454, 459 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); State v. Ibarra, 953 S.W.2d 242, 245 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997).
6 Tex. R. Evid. 404(b); Devoe v. State, 354 S.W.3d 457, 469 (Tex. Crim. App. 2011); see Nobles v. State, 843 S.W.2d 503, 514 (Tex. Crim. App.1992).
7 Devoe, 354 S.W.3d at 469; Moses v. State, 105 S.W.3d 622, 626 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003).
8 Tex. R. Evid. 404(b).
9 Williams v. State, 301 S.W.3d 675, 686-87 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009); De La Paz v. State, 279 S.W.3d 336, 345-47 (Tex. Crim. App. 2009).
10 Devoe, 354 S.W.3d at 469 (quoting Wyatt v. State, 23 S.W.3d 18, 25 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).
11 Devoe, 354 S.W.3d at 469; Camacho v. State, 864 S.W.2d 524, 532 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993); Quincy v. State, 304 S.W.3d 489, 502 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2009, no pet.).
12 Devoe, 354 S.W.3d at 469; Pondexter v. State, 942 S.W.2d 577, 584 (Tex. Crim. App.1996).

References: Art. 42
 §6
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.