# Lackey v. State

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · September 15, 1982 · 638 S.W.2d 439

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9863144

## Case

- **Full name:** Clarence Allen LACKEY, Appellant, v. the STATE of Texas, Appellee
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** September 15, 1982
- **Citations:** 638 S.W.2d 439; 1982 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1114
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Davis
- **Judges:** McCormick, Davis, Odom, Clinton, Dally, Onion, Roberts, Teague
- **Cited by:** 71 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9863144

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that defendant’s claim that he was entitled to mitigation instruction or special issue had been rejected by the Supreme court in Jurek v. Texas
- reasoning that written consent Atends to show that [the defendant=s] consent was definite and unequivocal@
- reasoning that written consent “tends to show that [the defendant’s] consent was definite and unequivocal”
- stating that absence of violence and physical coercion is indicative that consent was given voluntarily
- noting that a person will consider decision with more care and deliberation if he gives written as opposed to verbal consent

## Opinion text

TOM G. DAVIS, Judge,
concurring.
While I cannot join that portion of the opinion which holds that the issue of volun-tariness of Carol Johnson’s consent to search was not preserved for review, I agree that the evidence supports the conclusion that Johnson voluntarily consented to the search.
ONION, P. J., joins in this opinion.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9863144. Public record. Not legal advice.