From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Flores v. State

Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
Feb 12, 2016
No. 07-15-00075-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 12, 2016)

Opinion

No. 07-15-00075-CR

02-12-2016

ANTHONY FLORES, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE


On Appeal from the 364th District Court Lubbock County, Texas
Trial Court No. 2012-434171, Honorable Bradley S. Underwood, Presiding

CONCURRING OPINION

Before QUINN, C.J., and HANCOCK and PIRTLE, JJ.

I join in the majority opinion and judgment but write separately to distinguish this result from our decision in Hereford v. State, 444 S.W.3d 346 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 2014, no pet.). Hereford also involved the admission of a 911 call and the question of whether doing so violated the defendant's right to confront witnesses. In large part, we held the evidence inadmissible due to "the absence of any indicia suggesting the presence of some emergency." Id. at 351-52. Here, though, such indicia appear of record. Consequently, I too agree that the trial court did not abuse its discretion here by rejecting appellant's confrontation claim.

Brian Quinn

Chief Justice Do not publish.


Summaries of

Flores v. State

Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo
Feb 12, 2016
No. 07-15-00075-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 12, 2016)
Case details for

Flores v. State

Case Details

Full title:ANTHONY FLORES, APPELLANT v. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE

Court:Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

Date published: Feb 12, 2016

Citations

No. 07-15-00075-CR (Tex. App. Feb. 12, 2016)