in Re Edward Skinner
This text of in Re Edward Skinner (in Re Edward Skinner) 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
Opinion issued April 3, 2003
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
____________
NO. 01-03-00285-CV
IN RE EDWARD SKINNER, Relator
Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Relator, Edward Skinner, complains that he has been denied credit for time served. According to the petition, relator was convicted in cause number 91-12-01456-CR in the 23rd District Court, Brazoria County, and was sentenced to four years' confinement with credit for all four years in time served. Relator complains that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice has "stacked" his four-year sentence on a 25-year sentence he is presently serving in another case.
We deny the petition for writ of mandamus. We first observe that the granting of credit for jail time has historically been accomplished by post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 (Vernon 1977 & Supp. 2003); Ex parte Dunn, 976 S.W.2d 208 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
In addition, this Court has no mandamus jurisdiction over the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. See Tex. Gov't Code Ann. § 22.221 (Vernon Supp. 2003).
The petition for writ of mandamus is therefore denied.
It is so ORDERED.
PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices Taft, Keyes, and Higley.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
in Re Edward Skinner, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-edward-skinner-texapp-2003.