context: . Pelache's other issues are ancillary to his constitutional issues because they deal with the sufficiency of the evidence supporting the enhancement allegations and the trial court's calculation of the enhanced sentence. Therefore, we address Pelache's fifth and sixth issues out of order because they present a threshold question.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 754 S.W.2d 668, 675
citation_a.parenthetical: providing that the constitutionality of a statute is not to be determined in any case unless such a determination is absolutely necessary to decide the case in which the issue is raised
citation_a.sentence: See In the Interest of B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d 340, 349 (Tex.2003) (noting the prudential principle that we decide constitutional questions only when we cannot resolve issues on nonconstitutional grounds); see also., Turner v. State, 754 S.W.2d 668, 675 (Tex.Crim.App.1988) (providing that the constitutionality of a statute is not to be determined in any case unless such a determination is absolutely necessary to decide the case in which the issue is raised).
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 113 S.W.3d 340, 349
citation_b.parenthetical: noting the prudential principle that we decide constitutional questions only when we cannot resolve issues on nonconstitutional grounds
citation_b.sentence: See In the Interest of B.L.D., 113 S.W.3d 340, 349 (Tex.2003) (noting the prudential principle that we decide constitutional questions only when we cannot resolve issues on nonconstitutional grounds); see also., Turner v. State, 754 S.W.2d 668, 675 (Tex.Crim.App.1988) (providing that the constitutionality of a statute is not to be determined in any case unless such a determination is absolutely necessary to decide the case in which the issue is raised).