Second Court of Appeals

Summaries of Civil Opinions and Published Criminal Opinions Issued - Week of March 3, 2025.

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.

Staley v. State, No. 02-23-00053-CR (Mar. 6, 2025) (Kerr, J., joined by Womack, J.; Walker, J., concurs with opinion).

Held: Because the search-warrant affidavit at issue did not allege any factual connection—a nexus—between the offense under investigation and any of Appellant’s electronic devices, the warrant affidavit lacked probable cause for the seizure and search of Appellant’s electronic devices, and the trial court erred by denying Appellant’s pretrial motion to suppress evidence discovered on those devices. The trial court’s failure to grant Appellant’s suppression motion was not harmless error.

Concurrence: Sometimes following the law can lead to a seemingly unjust result. The relevant law is unequivocal in the protection it affords to the citizenry and in the appropriate process it demands for law enforcement’s search and seizure. Conclusory, boilerplate language in a search-warrant affidavit—without specific facts that connects the item to be searched to the alleged offense—is insufficient to establish probable cause.