Ex Parte Eugene Franklin

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Ex Parte Eugene Franklin

268 S.W. 749, 99 Tex. Crim. 255, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 116

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedFebruary 11, 1925

DocketNo. 9251.

StatusPublished

This text of 268 S.W. 749 (Ex Parte Eugene Franklin) 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 Eugene Franklin, 268 S.W. 749, 99 Tex. Crim. 255, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 116 (Tex. 1925).

Pincite

Opinion

LATTIMORE, Judge.

On January 14, 1925, this appellant presented an application for habeas corpus to the Honorable Joel R. Bond, Judge of the trial court, who granted same, and on January 17th, following, heard the cause. The statement of facts which we find in the record shows that the entries on the trial docket of the court below were introduced, showing that appellant was tried in causes 8462-8463, and in each case was convicted. Copies of the judgments and sentences in each case also appear and as far as we can determine, are regular, the sentence in the latter ease being made cumulative of that in the former. We have no brief on file, and are unable to perceive the object of this writ. Appellant was remanded by the court to the custody of the sheriff. The remanding judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

LATTIMORE, Judge.

On January 14, 1925, this appellant presented an application for habeas corpus to the Honorable Joel R. Bond, Judge of the trial court, who granted same, and on January 17th, following, heard the cause. The statement of facts which we find in the record shows that the entries on the trial docket of the court below were introduced, showing that appellant was tried in causes 8462-8463, and in each case was convicted. Copies of the judgments and sentences in each case also appear and as far as we can determine, are regular, the sentence in the latter ease being made cumulative of that in the former. We have no brief on file, and are unable to perceive the object of this writ. Appellant was remanded by the court to the custody of the sheriff. The remanding judgment will be affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

268 S.W. 749, 99 Tex. Crim. 255, 1925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 116, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-eugene-franklin-texcrimapp-1925.