Ex Parte Weaver

537 S.W.2d 252, 1976 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 967
CourtCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas
DecidedMay 26, 1976
Docket51531
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 537 S.W.2d 252 (Ex Parte Weaver) 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 Weaver, 537 S.W.2d 252, 1976 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 967 (Tex. 1976).

Opinion

OPINION

ROBERTS, Judge.

This is a habeas corpus application under Art. 11.07, V.A.C.C.P. Petitioner was convicted on July 13, 1970 of burglary with intent to commit theft, enhanced under Art. 62, V.A.P.C., in the 187th District Court of Bexar County. His punishment was fixed at twelve years.

Petitioner makes numerous attacks on the validity of his conviction, none of which have merit. The case was submitted on the limited question of his right to good time credits under Art. 6166v, V.A.C.S. Though petitioner’s success on this point would not entitle him to release, the duration of a prisoner’s confinement is a proper subject for habeas corpus. Preiser v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 475, 93 S.Ct. 1827, 36 L.Ed.2d 439 (1973).

Art. 6166v, adopted in 1927, allows inmates to receive certain bonus days credit for each month served without misconduct. The bonus days per month increase for each year the prisoner is in confinement. Art. 61847, V.A.C.S., adopted in 1943 and amended in 1945 and 1949, allows bonus days to be credited to an inmate’s sentence depending on his classification and trusty status. Under Art. 61847, alone, petitioner would be entitled to 30 days credit per month on his sentence, but under both good time statutes, he would be entitled to 34-35 days credit per month. The Texas Department of Corrections figures good time only under Art. 61847.

A close examination reveals the following language in Art. 61847, the last-enacted statute:

“No overtime allowance or credits, in addition to the commutation of time herein provided for good conduct, may be deducted from the term or terms of sentences . . . .”

The sentence quoted also states one exception which is not relevant here. We find the above-quoted language explicit enough to repeal Art. 6166v, and we so hold. It follows that petitioner is entitled to no relief.

The petition for writ of habeas corpus is in all things denied.

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

Related

in Re: James Thomas Smith
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2007
Ex Parte Millard
48 S.W.3d 190 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 2001)
State Ex Rel. Holmes v. Honorable Court of Appeals for the Third District
885 S.W.2d 389 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1994)
Ex Parte Canada
754 S.W.2d 660 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1988)
Sanders v. State
580 S.W.2d 349 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1978)
Gardner v. State
542 S.W.2d 127 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1976)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
537 S.W.2d 252, 1976 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 967, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-weaver-texcrimapp-1976.