Hamal v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this CaseA DPS trooper stopped appellant for speeding. When the trooper asked appellant whether she had ever been in trouble for anything, she answered "no." This case involved a motion to suppress evidence that was seized because, among other things, a criminal history check revealed that appellant's answer was inaccurate. The case also involved the meaning of "disputed fact issue" in the context of an Article 38.23 jury instruction. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that the court of appeals correctly decided the suppression question but incorrectly decided the jury instruction issue. Consequently, the Court reversed the court of appeals' judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.