Ex Parte Leachman
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Opinion of the Court
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.
Upon original submission of this cause it was stressed in oral argument that the purported judgment under which relator was held was a “floating” judgment, in that it was not to become final except upon the happening of a subsequent contingency. The appeal was disposed of upon that question. In his motion for rehearing it is made clear that the purported judgment was not only attacked upon the point mentioned, but also upon the proposition that it was in fact no judgment at all. We now address ourselves to that question.
The only thing claimed…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Harris County v. StewartTexas Supreme Court · 1897
- Muckenfuss v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1909
- Donegan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1920
- McCallan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1929
- Baker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1908
3Cited by9 opinions
- Hammond v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1990
- State v. CampbellCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1992
- Deal v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1968
- Lewis v. Texas Department of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1966
- Tomlinson v. Texas Department of Public SafetyCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1968
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.