Ex parte Grooms

468 S.W.2d 817, 1971 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1628
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJuly 14, 1971
DocketNo. 44295
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 468 S.W.2d 817 (Ex parte Grooms) 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 Grooms, 468 S.W.2d 817, 1971 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1628 (Tex. 1971).

Opinion

OPINION

ODOM, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County remanding appellant to custody to await extradition to Utah.

Appellant contends that the court committed error at the extradition hearing, the first contention being the insufficiency of the executive warrant, in that such warrant was signed by “Ben Barnes, Acting Governor.” He contends that the state must show the incapacity of the Governor to perform his duties on the day in question. Such contention is without merit. In Ex parte Raulie, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 616, 237 S.W.2d 998, a case similar to the one at bar, this court stated:

“Under similar facts, we held in Ex parte Roselle, 87 Tex.Cr.R. 470, 222 S.W. 248, that the burden was upon the accused to show that the executive warrant was issued without authority.”

See also Ex parte DuBois, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 463, 243 S.W.2d 698.

The first contention is overruled.

Next, appellant alleges “ * * * that the demand for the relator is based upon an improper, unconstitutional identification of the relator * *

We first note that the record does not reflect the manner in which the appellant was identified, but only the affidavits of persons who identified him as the one who committed the offense in Utah. Further, such contention is not relevant to the sufficiency of the extradition documents, but rather to the admissibility of evidence in the Utah trial of this cause.

This contention is without merit.

[818]*818No motion for rehearing will be entertained or filed by the Clerk except by leave of this court, after good cause has been shown.

There being no reversible error, the judgment is affirmed.

ONION, P. J., not participating.

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

Related

Jaques v. Bray
645 P.2d 22 (Supreme Court of Colorado, 1982)
State Ex Rel. Garner v. Gray
208 N.W.2d 161 (Wisconsin Supreme Court, 1973)
State Ex Rel. Mitchell v. Allen
185 S.E.2d 355 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1971)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
468 S.W.2d 817, 1971 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1628, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-grooms-texcrimapp-1971.