Eric Greenville v. State
This text of Eric Greenville v. State (Eric Greenville v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Eric Greenville was indicted by a grand jury for felony driving while intoxicated. Greenville filed an application for writ of habeas corpus. The trial court denied the writ. From that order, Greenville brings this appeal. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.08 (Vernon 1977).
Appellant claims the State is estopped from prosecuting this case on the grounds of double jeopardy. The hearing on the petition suggests the basis for the claim is the ALR hearing regarding the same facts as this case. That proceeding does not implicate double jeopardy rights. See Tharp v. State, 935 S.W.2d 157, 161 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). See also Reynolds v. State, 4 S.W.3d 13, 20-21 (Tex. Crim. App. 1999).
Appellant appears to raise the issue of entrapment in claiming Officer Noe became a party to the offense and is criminally responsible for appellant's commission of the crime. While appellant may raise that defense to prosecution, it is not a proper ground for habeas corpus relief. See Tex. Pen. Code Ann. §§ 2.03, 8.06 (Vernon 2003). Appellant has an adequate remedy by appeal. See Ex parte McCullough, 966 S.W.2d 529, 531 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
The order of the trial court denying the writ of habeas corpus is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
PER CURIAM
Submitted on October 21, 2004
Opinion Delivered October 27, 2004
Do not publish
Before McKeithen, C.J., Burgess, and Gaultney, JJ.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Eric Greenville v. State, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eric-greenville-v-state-texapp-2004.