Maurice Eugene Dancy, Appellant v. the State of Texas, Appellee

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas affirmed the conviction, holding that Maurice Dancy was not under arrest or seized when he voluntarily went to the police station, so the hair sample and shoes were admissible, and that the search warrant, despite alleged false statements, contained sufficient probable cause to be valid. A dissent argued that Dancy was effectively detained and that the evidence should have been suppressed.