Opinion · Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit

John Henry Selvage v. James A. Collins, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division

897 F.2d 745

Type
Opinion
Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction
Federal
Date
1990-03-06
Topic
bankruptcy

BY THE COURT: CERTIFICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS PURSUANT TO RULE 214 TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE TO THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE HONORABLE JUSTICES THEREOF: The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on remand from the United States Supreme Court has decided that this case presents a question of law that may be determinative of this case, for which there is no controlling precedent in the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The question is whether petitioner Selvage’s claim under Penry v. Lynaugh, 492 U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 2934, 106 L.Ed.2d 256 (1989), is presently procedurally barred under Texas law. We certify this question pursuant to Rule 214, Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The question was framed by the United States Supreme Court in its per curiam opinion filed February 21, 1990, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 974, 108 L.Ed.2d 93.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed John Henry Selvage v. James A. Collins, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Institutional Division. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Authority status
pending
Cited by
12 opinions
SELVAGE v. COLLINS,897 F.2d 745(5th Cir. 1990)
JOHN HENRY SELVAGE, PETITIONER-APPELLEE, v. JAMES A. COLLINS, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
No. 88-2278.
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
March 6, 1990.
Robert S. Walt, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jim Mattox, Atty. Gen., Austin, Tex., for respondent-appellant.

David Cunningham, Houston, Tex., George H. Kendall, New York City, for petitioner-appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas; Norman W. Black, Judge.
Before POLITZ, WILLIAMS, and HIGGINBOTHAM Circuit Judges.
BY THE COURT:

[1] CERTIFICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS PURSUANT TO RULE 214 TEXAS RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE

[2] TO THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS AND THE HONORABLE JUSTICES THEREOF:

[3] The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on remand from the United States Supreme Court has decided that this case presents a question of law that may be determinative of this case, for which there is no controlling precedent in the decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeals. The question is whether petitioner Selvage's claim underPenry v. Lynaugh,492 U.S. ___,109 S.Ct. 2934,106 L.Ed.2d 256(1989), is presently procedurally barred under Texas law. We certify this question pursuant to Rule 214, Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. The question was framed by the United States Supreme Court in its per curiam opinion filed February 21, 1990, ___ U.S. ___,110 S.Ct. 974,108 L.Ed.2d 93.

[4] The procedural history of this case is set out inSelvage v.State,680 S.W.2d 17(Tex.Crim.App. 1984);Selvage v. Lynaugh,823 F.2d 845(5th Cir. 1987),cert. denied,484 U.S. 933,108 S.Ct. 309,98 L.Ed.2d 268(1987);Selvage v. Lynaugh,842 F.2d 89(5th Cir. 1988),stay granted pending cert.,485 U.S. 983,108 S.Ct. 1283,99 L.Ed.2d 494(1988),cert. granted in part,(Oct. 10, 1989), ___ U.S. ___,110 S.Ct. 231,107 L.Ed.2d 182(1989).

[5] The names and addresses of counsel for each party are set out in the appendix.
APPENDIX A
Jim Mattox, Attorney General

Robert S. Walt, Assistant Attorney General

Capitol Station

Austin, Texas 78711Page 746

David P. Cunningham, Esq.

Attorney for Petitioner

1927 Norfolk

Houston, Texas 77098

Julius L. Chambers, Esq.

NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Inc.

99 Hudson Street

New York, New York 10013

George H. Kendall, Esq.

31 Elm Street, Suite 236

Springfield, Massachusetts 01103