in Re Alan Dee Hulslander

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJune 17, 2004
Docket11-04-00152-CR
StatusPublished

This text of in Re Alan Dee Hulslander (in Re Alan Dee Hulslander) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
in Re Alan Dee Hulslander, (Tex. Ct. App. 2004).

Opinion

11th Court of Appeals

Eastland, Texas

Opinion

In re Alan Dee Hulslander

             No. 11-04-00152-CR -- Original Proceeding

             Alan Dee Hulslander has filed in this court a pro se “Motion for Credit Time Served on an Ankle Monitor.” Hulslander states that he was charged with murder in 2001, that the murder was committed in 1998, and that he entered a nolo contendere plea in Midland County. Hulslander further states that he is presently confined by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice - Institutional Division at the Stevenson Unit in Cuero, that he is the primary support for his wife and four daughters, and that he “has always been a Christian Based Husband and Community Leader, since moving to Midland County in 1991.” Hulslander asks that this court grant him credit for the 520 days he wore an ankle monitor prior to his conviction.

             The clerk of this court wrote Hulslander stating that it appeared that this court did not have jurisdiction over the matter and requesting that Hulslander respond showing grounds for continuing his action. Hulslander has responded, again stating that he would like this court to grant him credit for the time that he wore an ankle monitor as a condition of his pretrial bail bond. Hulslander’s response does not show grounds upon which to continue his action in this court.

              An appeal from the murder charge was not perfected to this court, and Hulslander’s motion for credit for time served wearing an ankle monitor does not invoke the original jurisdiction of this court. See Deifik v. State, 58 S.W.3d 794 (Tex.App. - Fort Worth 2001, pet’n ref’d). Therefore, this court lacks jurisdiction to consider the motion.

             Hulslander’s motion for credit for time served is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

                                                                                           PER CURIAM

June 17, 2004

Do not publish. See TEX.R.APP.P. 47.2(b).

Panel consists of: Arnot, C.J., and

Wright, J., and McCall, J.

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

Related

Deifik v. State
58 S.W.3d 794 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
in Re Alan Dee Hulslander, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-alan-dee-hulslander-texapp-2004.