Ex Parte Holmes

397 S.W.2d 458, 1965 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1155
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedDecember 1, 1965
Docket38747
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 397 S.W.2d 458 (Ex Parte Holmes) 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 Holmes, 397 S.W.2d 458, 1965 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1155 (Tex. 1965).

Opinion

BELCHER, Commissioner.

This is an appeal from an order issued in a habeas corpus proceeding remanding the appellant to custody for extradition to the state of Louisiana.

The disposition hereof makes a summary of the evidence introduced on the hearing unnecessary.

It is undisputed that the appellant timely and properly requested and made demand upon the state that he or his attorney be furnished with the copies of the instruments relied upon for his extradition; and that the state failed to furnish him or his attorney said instruments.

In considering a similar contention this court in Ex parte Tucker, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 286, 324 S.W.2d 853, said:

“The right of the appellant to copies of said instruments is a valuable right conferred by statute and it becomes mandatory upon demand. Art. 1008a, Sec. 3, supra; Ex parte Moore, 158 Tex.Cr.R. 407, 256 S.W.2d 103. Whether the necessary facts exist for the issuance of the extradition warrant, such as the fact that the accused is substantially charged with a crime by indictment or other accusatory pleading as provided by statute duly authenticated by the executive authority of the demanding state or that she is a fugitive from justice is a question of law which is subject to judicial inquiry on the hearing of an application for discharge under a writ of habeas corpus. Therefore, it is evident that such instruments are vitally essential in considering and determining the legality of his arrest. Art. 1008a, Secs. 3 and 10, supra; 19 Tex.Jur. 508, Sec. 19; Ex parte Anderson, 135 Tex.Cr.R. 291, 120 S.W.2d 259; Ex parte McMillan, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 355, 242 S.W.2d 384.”

*459 The failure to furnish said copies of the instruments requires a reversal of the order of the trial court denying the relief prayed for.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.

Opinion approved by the Court.

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

Related

Ex Parte: Lawrence Miller v. State
Court of Appeals of Texas, 1993
Ex Parte Sanchez
605 S.W.2d 289 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1980)
Ex parte Lippincott
487 S.W.2d 333 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1972)
Ex Parte Kronhaus
410 S.W.2d 442 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1967)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
397 S.W.2d 458, 1965 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1155, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-holmes-texcrimapp-1965.