Ex Parte Clear

573 S.W.2d 224, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1351
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedNovember 1, 1978
Docket59288
StatusPublished
Cited by71 cases

This text of 573 S.W.2d 224 (Ex Parte Clear) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Clear, 573 S.W.2d 224, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1351 (Tex. 1978).

Opinions

OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

This is an application for a writ of habeas corpus filed originally in this Court. Relator alleges that the district court illegally assumed jurisdiction as a magistrate of a felony complaint filed against him in justice court and unlawfully raised his bond from one thousand to two thousand dollars. We agree and grant the relief requested.

I.

On July 8, 1978, the State filed a felony complaint against the relator David Clear. The complaint alleged that relator had, by causing bodily injury, assaulted a police officer who was, at the time of the assault, in the lawful discharge of an official duty. See V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Sec. 22.02(a)(2). The complaint was filed in justice court precinct 2, position 2 of Harris County.

The complaint, along with supporting statements alleged to show probable cause, was sworn to before an assistant district attorney and presented to the Honorable Lawrence H. Wayne, who was acting as a [226]*226magistrate.1 Judge Wayne is Justice of the Peace for precinct 1, position 2 of Harris County. On the same day the complaint was filed, a warrant was issued by Judge Wayne, who also set relator’s bond at one thousand dollars. On July 10, 1978, relator was arrested under the warrant and placed in jail. Shortly after relator’s arrest, a probable cause hearing was conducted by the Honorable N. 0. Morrison, Justice of the Peace for precinct 3, position 2 of Harris County.2 The record reveals without dispute that Judge Morrison and Judge Wayne were acting on behalf of the Honorable D. F. Thompson, Justice of the Peace for precinct 2, position 2, where the complaint was filed. Their actions were in accord with the broad language of Art. 2393a, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St., which provides:

“A justice may hold court for any other justice whose precinct is in the same county; and the justices of a county may exchange benches whenever they deem it expedient.”

On July 11, 1978, relator executed a bail bond in the amount of one thousand dollars and was released from custody. The next day he appeared before the Honorable George L. Walker, Presiding Judge of the 185th District Court of Harris County, for a !‘48-hour hearing.”

These 48-hour hearings were established by an order entered by the Honorable Mi-ron A. Love, Presiding Judge of the 177th District Court of Harris County, acting as administrative judge for Harris County. See Art. 199a, Sec. 2.003, Vernon’s Ann. Civ.St. The order reads as follows:

“ORDER
“BY ORDER OF THE DISTRICT JUDGES OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, TRYING CRIMINAL CASES THERE IS HEREBY CREATED A FORTY EIGHT HOUR HEARING FOR ALL FELONY CASES FILED IN HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS WHICH FORTY EIGHT HOUR HEARINGS SHALL BE HELD IN THE DISTRICT COURTS HAVING SUCH FELONY CASES PREASSIGNED TO THEM RESPECTIVELY.
“IT SHALL BE THE DUTY OF THE CLERK TO FILE AND DOCKET CASES INTO THE DISTRICT COURTS ASSUMING JURISDICTION TO REVIEW AND SET BONDS AND APPOINT ATTORNEYS IN FELONY CASE COMPLAINTS ASSIGNED TO THEM, AND TO RECORD, ENTER, AND FILE ALL PROCESS APERTAIN-ING TO SAID CASES.
“IT SHALL FURTHER BE THE DUTY OF THE CLERK TO ENTER ALL SUCH TRANSACTIONS IN REGARD TO THE ABOVE MENTIONED CASES INTO THE JUSTICE INFORMATION MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND TO MAKE SUCH OTHER ENTRIES, EITHER AUTOMATED OR MANUAL, AS MAY BE NECESSARY TO RECORD PROCEEDINGS HAD AT THE FORTY EIGHT HOUR HEARINGS.
“THIS ORDER TO BE EFFECTIVE Aug 15. 1977.
“DONE AND ENTERED THIS THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 1977.
/s/ Miron A. Love
“MIRON A. LOVE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS”

See also Gerstein v. Pugh, supra (note 2); Alberti v. Sheriff of Harris County, supra (note 2).

As can be seen, the principal stated purpose of the hearing is “to review and set bonds and appoint attorneys in felony case complaints.” It appears from the record that the hearing is also used to determine whether the accused is willing to waive his right to proceed by indictment. Finally, it appears that the hearing is used by the judge to make a general inquiry about the [227]*227representation of the accused by counsel. In those cases where the accused is not indigent, he is admonished to retain counsel within a very short time after the hearing.

When relator appeared for his 48-hour hearing on July 12, 1978, Judge Walker ordered that the hearing be recessed until the following morning and instructed relator to return at that time accompanied by retained counsel.

On July 13, 1978, relator appeared without counsel at the recessed hearing. According to his sworn statement filed in this Court, relator had attempted to get in touch with an attorney he wanted to employ, but he had been unsuccessful in doing so. However, there is some dispute whether he made this fact known to Judge Walker on July 13th. The record reflects that Judge Walker’s perception was that relator was not “earnestly seeking to employ counsel,” but that “instead, he made light of the court’s admonition on the importance of retaining counsel or establishing the need of appointment of counsel.”

Judge Walker decided that relator was likewise insufficiently concerned about the seriousness of being charged with a felony offense. Because of this perceived lack of concern about counsel and the charges against him, relator was deemed by Judge Walker unlikely to appear in court when required to do so. And, since relator did not indicate at the hearing “that he was not able to employ counsel or to make a higher bond,” Judge Walker revoked the thousand-dollar bond and increased relator’s bail to two thousand dollars. Relator was then taken into custody, from which he was released after posting a two-thousand-dollar bail bond.

At some time on July 13,1978 (the day of this last hearing) Judge Walker entered the following order:

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

Related

Daves v. Dallas County
22 F.4th 522 (Fifth Circuit, 2022)
in Re: The State of Texas
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2021
Daves v. Dallas Cty
984 F.3d 381 (Fifth Circuit, 2020)
Booth v. Galveston Cnty.
352 F. Supp. 3d 718 (S.D. Texas, 2019)
David Charles Davidson v. State
422 S.W.3d 750 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2013)
Artemio Orlando Sanchez v. State
425 S.W.3d 347 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2011)
Trejo v. State
280 S.W.3d 258 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2009)
Trejo, Roberto Yarit
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2009
Untitled Texas Attorney General Opinion
Texas Attorney General Reports, 2008
Rothgery v. GILLESPIE COUNTY, TEXAS
537 F.3d 716 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
Walter Allen Rothgery v. Gillespie County, Texas
491 F.3d 293 (Fifth Circuit, 2007)
Opinion No.
Texas Attorney General Reports, 2006
Jesse Don Bitner v. State
135 S.W.3d 906 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2004)
Guerra v. Garza
987 S.W.2d 593 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1999)
Ex Parte Dobbs
978 S.W.2d 959 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Ex Parte Dobbs
957 S.W.2d 654 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Ex Parte Jack Dobbs
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997
Ex Parte Chavfull
945 S.W.2d 183 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1997)
Ex Parte Knight
904 S.W.2d 722 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
573 S.W.2d 224, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1351, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-clear-texcrimapp-1978.