Howard Earl Roquemore, Jr., Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals reversed the Court of Appeals and remanded for a harm analysis, holding that the appellant’s oral statements were admissible because they were not the result of custodial interrogation, but that testimony concerning the recovery of stolen property must be suppressed because the officers violated Family Code §52.02(a) by not taking the juvenile first to a processing office. Justice HOLCOMB, in a concurring opinion, questioned the majority’s characterization of a strict‑compliance policy, and Justice WOMACK, also concurring, emphasized the limited role of exigent‑circumstance exceptions.