Walter Bell, Jr., Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the warrantless arrest was illegal because exigent circumstances were not satisfied, thus the first confession and related evidence were excluded as fruit of the illegal arrest, but the second confession and evidence obtained after a warrant was issued were admissible. The Court also upheld the trial court's rulings on juror challenges and other issues. Justice Teague dissented on the arrest and future‑dangerousness issues, while Justices Clinton and McCormick concurred in the result but disagreed with parts of the majority’s reasoning.