Ex parte Shannon

564 S.W.2d 768, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1123
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 19, 1978
DocketNo. 58332
StatusPublished

This text of 564 S.W.2d 768 (Ex parte Shannon) 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 Shannon, 564 S.W.2d 768, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1123 (Tex. 1978).

Opinion

OPINION

PHILLIPS, Judge.

This is an application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to Art. 11.07, V.A.C. C.P.

Petitioner was convicted of the offense of robbery by assault under the old Penal Code in Cause No. 10,826 on his plea of guilty to the court. A 10-year term of imprisonment was assessed, and no appeal was perfected.

Petitioner has filed his application for writ of habeas corpus in the trial court, contending that the indictment in this case [769]*769is fundamentally defective for the reasons set out in Lucero v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 502 S.W.2d 128, and Bouie v. State, Tex.Cr. App., 528 S.W.2d 587. The trial court made findings of fact and conclusions of law and recommended that the application for writ of habeas corpus be granted.

In reviewing the record before this Court and the indictment in this cause, we are in agreement with petitioner that the indictment for robbery by assault is fatally defective for the same reasons set out in Lucero v. State, supra, and Bouie v. State, supra. See also Batro v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 531 S.W.2d 614; Page v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 532 S.W.2d 341; Jones v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 535 S.W.2d 184. These cases held that an indictment which failed to allege the party to whom the property allegedly taken belonged (in the robbery) was fundamentally defective.

A petitioner may challenge fundamentally defective indictments by way of a post conviction application for writ of habe-as corpus. See Standley v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 517 S.W.2d 538; Ex parte Roberts, Tex.Cr.App., 522 S.W.2d 461; Ex parte Cannon, Tex.Cr.App., 546 S.W.2d 266; Ex parte Jones, Tex.Cr.App., 542 S.W.2d 179; Ex parte Davis, Tex.Cr.App., 547 S.W.2d 43.

The relief prayed for is granted, and the prosecution under this indictment is ordered dismissed.

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

Related

Bouie v. State
528 S.W.2d 587 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Ex Parte Cannon
546 S.W.2d 266 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Page v. State
532 S.W.2d 341 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Ex Parte Jones
542 S.W.2d 179 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Standley v. State
517 S.W.2d 538 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Batro v. State
531 S.W.2d 614 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Lucero v. State
502 S.W.2d 128 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1973)
Ex Parte Roberts
522 S.W.2d 461 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1975)
Jones v. State
535 S.W.2d 184 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)
Ex parte Davis
547 S.W.2d 43 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
564 S.W.2d 768, 1978 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1123, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-shannon-texcrimapp-1978.