Ex Parte Jetter

495 S.W.2d 925, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2635
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 13, 1973
Docket47035
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 495 S.W.2d 925 (Ex Parte Jetter) 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 Jetter, 495 S.W.2d 925, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2635 (Tex. 1973).

Opinion

OPINION

MORRISON, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of ha-beas corpus remanding appellant to custody for extradition to the State of Florida.

The Governor’s warrant was admitted into evidence. It appears regular on its face and makes out a prima facie case authorizing extradition. Ex parte Dumas, Tex.Cr.App., 487 S.W.2d 753, and cases there cited.

Appellant’s two contentions relate to her status as a juvenile. She first contends that the 194th District Court did not have jurisdiction to hear her application for writ of habeas corpus in this extradition proceeding because she had not been certified as an adult in either Texas or Florida. She also contends that Florida should have proceeded under the Uniform Interstate Compact on Juveniles, Article 5143, Vernon’s Ann.Civ.St., rather than the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act, Article 51.13, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P.

Whether appellant will have to be certified as an adult to stand trial for the crime in the State of Florida once she is extradited is a question for the courts of the State of Florida to determine and not one for the courts of the State of Texas. Cf. Ex parte Watson, Tex.Cr.App., 455 S.W.2d 300, and the cases cited therein.

Further, we find no limitation in the Uniform Criminal Extradition Act excluding minors from its operation. It should be remembered that the State of Florida *926 is not asking for the return of this petitioner to answer the charge of being a juvenile delinquent, but is seeking her delivery to stand trial for the offense of murder in the first degree.

We find each ground of error to be without merit. The judgment remanding appellant to custody for delivery to the State of Florida is affirmed.

ONION, P. J., dissents.

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

Related

In re Boynton
840 N.W.2d 762 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 2013)
State v. J.M.W.
936 So. 2d 555 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 2005)
In Re State v. J.M.W.
936 So. 2d 555 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama, 2005)
State v. Cook
64 P.3d 58 (Court of Appeals of Washington, 2003)
Coble v. Magone
744 P.2d 1244 (Montana Supreme Court, 1987)
Juvenile
484 N.E.2d 995 (Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, 1985)
Burnham v. Hayward
663 P.2d 65 (Utah Supreme Court, 1983)
In Re Robert
406 A.2d 266 (Supreme Court of Rhode Island, 1979)
STATE EX REL. JUV. DEPT. OF WASH. v. Casteel
523 P.2d 1039 (Court of Appeals of Oregon, 1974)
Ex parte Haggard
501 S.W.2d 908 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1973)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
495 S.W.2d 925, 1973 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 2635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-jetter-texcrimapp-1973.