TX · rules
Tex. R. App. P. 66.3
Reasons for Granting Review
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
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.