Linder v. State
Texas Court of Appeals
779 S.W.2d 520 (1989)
Facts
Daniel Linder (defendant) worked as a bail bondsman and was arrested after he attempted to rearrest a person who was under bond but failed to appear in court, known as a bond jumper. Linder believed he was authorized to arrest the bond jumper due to an outstanding-arrest warrant. However, Linder did not realize that Texas law required Linder to be specifically named in the arrest warrant with authority to arrest. Linder was charged with kidnapping due to the unlawful arrest. At trial, Linder justified his mistaken interpretation of the law by citing a United States Supreme Court opinion from 1873 about the liability of a bondsman in Connecticut, claiming that he had relied on that opinion while making the arrest. He also claimed that he had made similar arrests in the past without getting in trouble. The jury convicted Linder, and he appealed, arguing that the evidence was insufficient to support the jury’s rejection of his affirmative defense of mistake of law.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Means, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 707,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
