Dansby v. Texas (Original)
Annotate this CaseAppellant Michael Dansby, Sr. argued on direct appeal that his deferred adjudication community supervision was revoked unconstitutionally as a penalty for invoking his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination by refusing to answer questions during the course of a court-imposed sexual history polygraph examination about past sexual assault offenses. In an unpublished opinion, the Dallas Court of Appeals declined to reach that issue, holding that the appellant's community supervision had been legitimately revoked on another basis-that he failed to successfully complete the court-ordered sex offender treatment program that the sexual history polygraph was designed to facilitate. The Supreme Court granted appellant's petition for discretionary review to address his contention that he was essentially discharged from the treatment program because he refused to answer incriminating questions during the course of the sexual history polygraph, and that the court of appeals therefore improperly dodged his constitutional claim.
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.