Ex parte Pennington

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Ex parte Pennington

433 S.W.2d 701, 1968 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1107

CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas

DecidedNovember 13, 1968

DocketNo. 41735

StatusPublished

This text of 433 S.W.2d 701 (Ex parte Pennington) 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 Pennington, 433 S.W.2d 701, 1968 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1107 (Tex. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

BELCHER, Judge.

The record reveals that the petition for writ of habeas corpus presented to the District Judge of San Patricio County, where the conviction was had and on appeal the judgment was affirmed by this court in January, 1963, was denied without a hearing by said judge upon his finding that the petition failed to present any valid grounds for petitioner’s discharge. The petitioner relies upon the decisions in Washington v. State of Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 87 S.Ct. 1920, 18 L.Ed.2d 1019, and Overton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 419 S.W.2d 371, to support his position that he was illegally restrained.

A certified copy of the petition for the writ and the order of the District Judge refusing a hearing thereon and denying any relief have been forwarded to this court as directed by said judge.

The petition denied by the District Judge is not before this court for action under Art. 11.07, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., for the reason that there is no petition, brief or request to this court seeking relief.

Ex parte Thomas, Tex.Cr.App., 429 S.W.2d 151, is applicable and controlling in this cause.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus which the clerk of this court was directed to file is dismissed.

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

OPINION

BELCHER, Judge.

The record reveals that the petition for writ of habeas corpus presented to the District Judge of San Patricio County, where the conviction was had and on appeal the judgment was affirmed by this court in January, 1963, was denied without a hearing by said judge upon his finding that the petition failed to present any valid grounds for petitioner’s discharge. The petitioner relies upon the decisions in Washington v. State of Texas, 388 U.S. 14, 87 S.Ct. 1920, 18 L.Ed.2d 1019, and Overton v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 419 S.W.2d 371, to support his position that he was illegally restrained.

A certified copy of the petition for the writ and the order of the District Judge refusing a hearing thereon and denying any relief have been forwarded to this court as directed by said judge.

The petition denied by the District Judge is not before this court for action under Art. 11.07, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P., for the reason that there is no petition, brief or request to this court seeking relief.

Ex parte Thomas, Tex.Cr.App., 429 S.W.2d 151, is applicable and controlling in this cause.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus which the clerk of this court was directed to file is dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

433 S.W.2d 701, 1968 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1107, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-pennington-texcrimapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack