Legal Opinion

Hubbard v. State

Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)

Decided April 15, 1983No. 05-82-00467-CRPublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AKIN, Justice.

Before us is appellant’s second motion to extend the time for filing his brief. For the reasons stated below, we deny this motion without prejudice to the filing of a proper motion under Tex.R.Crim.App.P. 6, and we direct counsel for appellant to file a proper motion.

In two cases, appellant was convicted of unlawful delivery of heroin. In a third case appellant was convicted of bribery. All three cases were tried together, the appellant was found guilty in each case and was sentenced to prison. The trial court appointed Edwin V. King, a licensed attorney, to represent defendant…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Texaco Inc. v. JoffrionCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1962
  2. Nobles v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1983
  3. Vitela v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Newfield v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1989
  2. In the Interest of J.I.Court of Appeals of Texas · 2005
  3. Thomas v. StateCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1985
  4. Anthony Salinas v. the State of Texas, Texas Court of Appeals, 4th District (San Antonio)2022
  5. Arnoldo Vara Torres v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 1st District (Houston)2014

10 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