Ex parte Doby

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Ex parte Doby

391 S.W.2d 732

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedJune 23, 1965

DocketNo. 38229

StatusPublished

This text of 391 S.W.2d 732 (Ex parte Doby) 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 Doby, 391 S.W.2d 732 (Tex. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

MORRISON, Judge.

This is an original application for writ of habeas corpus. Our opinions affirming petitioner’s conviction appear in Doby v. State, 383 S.W.2d 418.

As we pointed out on motion for rehearing, the search warrant was exhibited to petitioner’s counsel, and after examination, counsel stated that he had no objection.

We held this application on our docket to await the action of the Supreme Court of the United States in Linkletter v. Walker, 85 S.Ct. 1731 (June 7, 1965) and Angelet v. Fay, 85 S.Ct. 1750 (June 7, 1965).

We have now concluded that even though petitioner was in the appellate process at the time the Supreme Court handed down Aguilar v. State of Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723, he may not avail himself in this collateral attack of the rule therein announced because of his failure to object to the introduction of the fruits of the search at the time of trial.

The writ of habeas corpus is denied.

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

MORRISON, Judge.

This is an original application for writ of habeas corpus. Our opinions affirming petitioner’s conviction appear in Doby v. State, 383 S.W.2d 418.

As we pointed out on motion for rehearing, the search warrant was exhibited to petitioner’s counsel, and after examination, counsel stated that he had no objection.

We held this application on our docket to await the action of the Supreme Court of the United States in Linkletter v. Walker, 85 S.Ct. 1731 (June 7, 1965) and Angelet v. Fay, 85 S.Ct. 1750 (June 7, 1965).

We have now concluded that even though petitioner was in the appellate process at the time the Supreme Court handed down Aguilar v. State of Texas, 378 U.S. 108, 84 S.Ct. 1509, 12 L.Ed.2d 723, he may not avail himself in this collateral attack of the rule therein announced because of his failure to object to the introduction of the fruits of the search at the time of trial.

The writ of habeas corpus is denied.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

391 S.W.2d 732, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-doby-texcrimapp-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack