Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Hill

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided December 6, 2006No. AP-75,508PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court 1

OPINION

2Opinion of the Court · CochranCochran, J.

in which KELLER, P.J., and MEYERS, WOMACK, HERVEY and HOLCOMB, JJ., joined.

We filed and set this application for a writ of habeas corpus to determine if applicant was improperly classified as “not eligible for mandatory-supervision release.” We deny relief, but note that applicant is only temporarily ineligible. On May 6, 2005, a parole panel reviewed applicant for release on mandatory supervision, but it concluded that (1) applicant’s accrued good conduct time is not an accurate reflection of his potential for rehabilitation, and (2) his release would endanger the public. It therefore…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Ex Parte GeikenCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2000
  2. Ex Parte RetzlaffCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004
  3. Ex Parte ErvinCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2005
  4. Ex Parte ShookCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2001

4Cited by10 opinions

  1. Andrus v. DavisDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2021
  2. Ex Parte HillCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2006
  3. Gill v. LumpkinDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2024
  4. Hill, Michael AnthonyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 2015
  5. Johnson v. WainwrightDistrict Court, S.D. Texas · 2020

5 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