Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued – Week of September 19, 2011

NOTE: Summaries are prepared by the court's staff attorneys and law clerks for public information only and reflect his or her interpretation alone of the facts and legal issues. The summaries are not part of the court's opinion in the case and should not be cited to, quoted, or relied upon as the opinion of the court.

Links to full text of opinions (PDF version) can be accessed by clicking the cause number.

Hamal v. State,   No. 02-09-00448-CR    (Sept. 22, 2011)   (Walker, J., joined by Gardner, J.; McCoy, J., concurs without opinion).

Held:   The trial court did not abuse its discretion by overruling Hamal's rule 702 objection to the officer's testimony about the canine sniff of Hamal's vehicle; the trial court did not err by denying Hamal's motion to suppress based on the officer's reasonable suspicion to continue detaining Hamal for a canine sniff, but because a factual dispute existed regarding reasonable suspicion for the continued detention, the trial court erred by denying Hamal's request for an article 38.23 jury instruction.

« Return to Case Summaries Home Page «