Bindinglaw

TX · rules

Tex. R. App. P. 66.3

Reasons for Granting Review

activein force · 2026-02-06 – presentact-effective-date

While neither controlling nor fully measuring the

Court of Criminal Appeals' discretion, the following

will be considered by the Court in deciding whether to

grant discretionary review:

(a) whether a court of appeals' decision conflicts

with another court of appeals' decision on the

same issue;

(b) whether a court of appeals has decided an

important question of state or federal law that

has not been, but should be, settled by the

Court of Criminal Appeals;

(c) whether a court of appeals has decided an

important question of state or federal law in a

way that conflicts with the applicable

decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeals or

the Supreme Court of the United States;

(d) whether a court of appeals has declared a

statute, rule, regulation, or ordinance

unconstitutional, or appears to have

misconstrued a statute, rule, regulation, or

ordinance;

(e) whether the justices of a court of appeals

have disagreed on a material question of law

necessary to the court's decision; and

(f) whether a court of appeals has so far departed

from the accepted and usual course of judicial

proceedings, or so far sanctioned such a

departure by a lower court, as to call for an

exercise of the Court of Criminal Appeals'

power of supervision.

History

Notes and Comments Comment to 1997 change: This is former Rule 200. The former rule's reference to motions for rehearing now appears in Rule 49.9. The rule is otherwise amended without substantive change.

Provenance

Source
txcourts.gov
Retrieved
2026-09-15
Edition
2026-09-14
Content hash
c7725c21b1640560b17d6a3fd84f6fa51c7e8be32808cd09339cda66bbf03e15
View the official source →

The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.

Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.

Coverage · API docs

Bindinglaw

Point-in-time US law with the receipt attached. Source URL, retrieval time, content hash, and validity dates on every answer.

curl api.binding.law/v1/law/coverage

© 2026 binding.law · a Jubal, Inc. productAttorneys and firms never pay. Ever.