Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Ex Parte Spaulding

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided March 13, 1985No. 69371Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partTeague, Judge

For the reasons expressed by Presiding Judge Onion in the dissenting opinion that he filed in Whan v. State, 485 S.W.2d 275 (Tex.Cr.App.1972), in which he held that the Governor of Texas may not commute any punishment assessed which, at the time of the order of commutation, was no longer in existence, I agree with the statement that Judge Clinton makes in the concurring opinion he has filed in this cause that Whan v. State, supra, was wrongly decided and its progeny are equally wrong. Cf. Sellars v. Estelle, 536 F.2d 1104 (5th Cir.1976), reh. den. 540 F.2d 1085, cert. den. 429 U.S. 1076, 97…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Marbury v. MadisonSupreme Court of the United States · 1803
  2. Ex Parte McIverCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
  3. Whan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1972
  4. Bogany v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1983
  5. Chambers v. HodgesTexas Supreme Court · 1859

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API