Opinion · Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Ex parte Loper
153 Tex. Crim. 240
- Type
- Opinion
- Court
- Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- Jurisdiction
- Texas
- Date
- 1949-03-09
- Topic
- general
How later courts describe this case
- noting that habeas corpus is not a substitute for appeal after determining that the convicting court had jurisdiction and the power to render the judgment
Citator
UpLaw has not yet analyzed Ex parte Loper. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.
- Authority status
- pending
- Cited by
- 10 opinions
It appears that the Harris County court had jurisdiction over the matter and power to hear and determine the same, and also the power to render the judgment which it did render. The judgment therein appears to be a valid one and is not subject to this attempted collateral attack. All matters offered herein should have been raised in the trial and appeal from the Harris County case.
Upon a hearing hereof the judge of the Houston County district court remanded relator to the custody of the prison authorities from which he appealed.
We express the opinion that this is an attempt to collaterally attack the Harris County judgment, and, as heretofore stated, all matters here offered should have been presented in the trial of the Harris County case.
The writ of habeas corpus cannot be resorted to in lieu of an appeal. See Ex parte Clinnard, 145 Tex. Cr. R. 460, 169 S. W. (2d) 181; Ex parte Minor, 146 Tex. Cr. R. 159, 172 S. W. (2d) 347; Ex parte Bonds, 148 Tex. Cr. R. 198, 185 S. W. (2d) 984; Ex parte Lagrone, 148 Tex. Cr. R. 390, 187 S. W. (2d) 574; Ex parte Ricketts, 148 Tex. Cr. R. 569, 189 S. W. (2d) 872.
The judgment refusing such discharge is therefore affirmed.