Ex parte Joyner
Court of Appeals of Texas
1DissentTracy Christopher, Justice
I respectfully dissent because (1) this court has made an improper assumption of fact; and (2) Joyner’s pretrial writ of ha-beas corpus alleges a constitutional impediment to prosecution that does not depend on his incarceration, so his imprisonment for another crime does not render his current appeal moot.
*739I. Improper Assumption of Fact
The State did not file a Motion to Dismiss, and our record in this case does not include information about Joyner’s current imprisonment on another charge. Only by examining court files for another case, Cause No. 14-11-00807-CR, did we discover that Joyner is…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Haines v. KernerSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. HalperSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Hudson v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Apolinar v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Beck v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.