Gregg Carl Baird, Appellant v. the State of Texas

Summary

The Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed the trial court's denial of the appellant's motion to suppress, holding that the statutory term “apparent” in Texas Penal Code §1.07(a)(11) means clear and manifest to the understanding, and that the appellant gave Dawn Killian apparent consent to enter his bedroom and use his computer. Accordingly, the evidence of child pornography was admissible under Article 38.23(a). A concurring opinion agreed with the construction of “apparent consent,” while a dissenting opinion argued that the dog sitter lacked consent and the evidence should have been excluded.