Ex Parte Bell

152 S.W.3d 103, 2004 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1831, 2004 WL 2538846
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas·Decided November 10, 2004·No. AP-75038·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinions

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

In his subsequent application for a writ of habeas corpus, applicant claimed that he is mentally retarded. We determined that applicant had met the requirements of Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, § 5, and we remanded to the trial court for findings of fact and conclusions of law. The trial court held an evidentiary hearing and found that applicant is mentally retarded. The record supports the trial court’s findings. Ex parte Briseno, 135 S.W.3d 1 (Tex.Crim.App.2004). Accordingly, we grant relief. We reform applicant’s sentence to life imprisonment in the Texas Department of Criminal Justice Correctional Institutions Division.

KELLER, P. J., delivered a concurring and dissenting opinion, joined by MEYERS, KEASLER, and HERVEY, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Ex Parte Bell, 152 S.W.3d 103, 2004 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1831, 2004 WL 2538846 (Tex. 2004).

152 S.W.3d 103 (Ex Parte Bell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hearn, Ex Parte Yokamon Laneal
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2010
Ex Parte Hearn
310 S.W.3d 424 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2010)
Van Alstyne, Ex Parte Gregory
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2007
Ex Parte Van Alstyne
239 S.W.3d 815 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2007)
Ex Parte Bell
152 S.W.3d 103 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2004)