in Re: David R. Hopkins
This text of in Re: David R. Hopkins (in Re: David R. Hopkins) 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.
Opinion
COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
|
IN RE: DAVID R. HOPKINS ,Relator. |
§ |
No. 08-03-00127-CR AN ORIGINAL PROCEEDING IN MANDAMUS |
David R. Hopkins seeks a writ of mandamus directing the trial court to grant him credit for time spent in a substance abuse felony treatment center as a condition of community supervision. This court has authority to issue a writ of mandamus in a criminal law matter if two conditions are met: 1) there is no adequate remedy at law; and 2) the act sought to be compelled is ministerial. Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241, 243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). In this case, Hopkins has an adequate remedy at law; he may seek relief through a petition for writ of habeas corpus. See id. (stating that a writ of habeas corpus is an adequate remedy at law); Ex parte Pizzalota, 610 S.W.2d 486, 488 (Tex. Crim. App. 1980) (granting habeas relief where petitioner had not received proper credits); see also Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art 11.07 (Vernon Supp. 2003) (setting forth the procedure to obtain habeas relief). Accordingly, we deny the petition for writ of mandamus.
March 27, 2003
RICHARD BARAJAS, Chief Justice
Before Panel No. 2
Barajas, C.J., McClure, and Chew, JJ.
(Do Not Publish)
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re: David R. Hopkins, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-david-r-hopkins-texapp-2003.