Robbins v. State

Court of Appeals of Texas

Robbins v. State

706 S.W.2d 351

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas

DecidedMarch 12, 1986

DocketNo. 2-85-197-CR

StatusPublished

This text of 706 S.W.2d 351 (Robbins v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Robbins v. State, 706 S.W.2d 351 (Tex. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinions

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

HOPKINS, Justice.

The State, in its Motion for Rehearing of 705 S.W.2d 398, urges us to hold the Speedy Trial Act, TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC. ANN. art. 32A.02 (Vernon Supp.1986), unconstitutional for the reason that the caption of said Act does not comply with the requirements of TEX. CONST, art. Ill, sec. 35.

This Court addressed this contention in the case of Wright v. State, 696 S.W.2d 288 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1985, no pet.), and the majority held that the Act was constitutional, therefore, the State’s Motion for Rehearing is overruled.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

HOPKINS, Justice.

The State, in its Motion for Rehearing of 705 S.W.2d 398, urges us to hold the Speedy Trial Act, TEX.CODE CRIM.PROC. ANN. art. 32A.02 (Vernon Supp.1986), unconstitutional for the reason that the caption of said Act does not comply with the requirements of TEX. CONST, art. Ill, sec. 35.

This Court addressed this contention in the case of Wright v. State, 696 S.W.2d 288 (Tex.App.—Fort Worth 1985, no pet.), and the majority held that the Act was constitutional, therefore, the State’s Motion for Rehearing is overruled.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

706 S.W.2d 351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/robbins-v-state-texapp-1986.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack