Ex Parte Keener

314 S.W.2d 93, 166 Tex. Crim. 326, 1958 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 4604

• Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
• Decided: June 4, 1958
• Docket: 29880
• Status: Published

Opinions

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

This is a habeas corpus proceeding wherein relator attacks as void the judgment and sentence under which he is confined in the penitentiary.

The conviction was in the Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County. Though not appealed to this court, the record of the evidence offered in the trial court is before us.

This case lies halfway between Crawford v. State, 161 Texas Cr. Rep. 554, 278 S.W. 2d 845, and Ex parte Clark, 164 Texas Cr. Rep. 385, 299 S.W. 2d 128, and involves an application of Article I, Section 10, Constitution of Texas, and Article 12, V.A.C.C.P. See also Shepherd v. State, 162 Texas Cr. Rep. 235, 284 S.W. 2d 155, and Ex parte Bruinsma, 164 Texas Cr. Rep. 358, 298 S.W. 2d 838.

The relator entered his plea of guilty before the court. His counsel waived the presence of the witnesses, and it was stipulated that if such witnesses were present they would testify to a certain state of facts which, if true, would have been sufficient to support the plea of guilty. Relator did not personally join in this stipulation but was sworn, testified and answered affirmatively when questioned if he had heard “this testimony as was stipulated here” and that it was substantially true and correct.

In Harper v. State, 148 Texas Cr. Rep. 354, 187 S.W. 2d 570, this court held that a judicial confession was sufficient to support a death penalty conviction even if the written confession be disregarded. Here we have a stipulation, plus the testimony of the accused that the matters stipulated were true and correct. This we deem sufficient to support the plea of guilty.

The writ of habeas corpus is denied.