Ware v. State

4 Citing cases

  1. Ware v. State

    736 S.W.2d 700 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987)   Cited 57 times
    Concluding that the resolution of issues addressing the validity of an affidavit and arrest warrant raised in an earlier appeal of the same case were subject to the law-of-the-case doctrine and, therefore, the resolution of those issues in the first appeal governed the disposition of the same issues on any subsequent appeal

    The appellant's Petition for Discretionary Review was granted to examine the Court of Appeals' conclusion that the affidavit and warrant that effectuated the appellant's arrest was valid and therefore the admission into evidence of a pistol discovered during a search incident to the arrest was valid. In a previous conviction of the appellant for possession of a firearm by a felon, which is integrally related to this appeal, Ware v. State, 685 S.W.2d 442 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1985, pet. granted), the Eleventh Court of Appeals reviewed the appellant's claim that the affidavit and warrant which produced his arrest lacked probable cause and a firearm seized as a result of the arrest should have been suppressed. The Court of Appeals concluded that the affidavit and warrant were valid and thus the weapon was admissible in evidence.

  2. Ware v. State

    697 S.W.2d 70 (Tex. App. 1985)   Cited 2 times

    ART. 42.08 (Vernon 1979). See Ware v. State, 685 S.W.2d 442 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1985, pet'n filed), which imposed punishment at 20 years confinement and a $10,000 fine for the unlawful possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. This Court affirmed that conviction on January 31, 1985, and the petition for discretionary review is pending in the Court of Criminal Appeals.

  3. Ware v. State

    724 S.W.2d 38 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)   Cited 15 times
    Finding that affidavit was insufficient under both Aguilar test and Gates "totality of the circumstances" analysis where "[n]o information" was "given as to the means by which the affiant obtained the information, or the underlying circumstances surrounding its acquisition"

    The Eastland Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's conviction in a published opinion. Ware v. State, 685 S.W.2d 442 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1985). We granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to consider appellant's single ground for review, which states:

  4. Dees v. State

    722 S.W.2d 209 (Tex. App. 1986)   Cited 25 times
    Considering only the nature of the crime and the punishment assessed in setting bail

    Under federal constitutional law, the insufficiency of an affidavit supporting a search warrant is not grounds for excluding seized evidence if the police acted in good faith on a duly issued warrant. United States v. Leon, 468 U.S. 897, 104 S.Ct. 3405, 82 L.Ed.2d 677 (1984); Nikrasch v. State, 698 S.W.2d 443 (Tex.App. — Dallas 1985, no pet.); Ware v. State, 685 S.W.2d 442 (Tex.App. — Eastland 1985, pet. granted); Adams v. State, 683 S.W.2d 525 (Tex.App. — Dallas 1984, pet. ref'd). The evidence adduced at the hearing on the motion to suppress is clearly sufficient to establish that Sheriff Hodges acted in good faith.