Legal Opinion

Ex Parte Harrell

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided October 20, 1976No. 52166PublishedCited by 72 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

ONION, Presiding Judge.

This a post-conviction habeas corpus proceeding brought under the provisions of Article 11.07, Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. Upon application to the convicting court, it was concluded that petitioner was not entitled to relief.

On July 2, 1975, the petitioner was convicted by virtue of two indictments, each charging the offense of unlawfully, knowingly and intentionally possessing a criminal instrument, namely, a forged prescription, with intent to use it in the commission of obtaining possession of a controlled substance. The offenses were alleged to have occurred on or…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Robinson v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Minnesota Ex Rel. Whipple v. MartinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1921
  3. Cuellar v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1975
  4. Hines v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1974
  5. Thomas v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1935

3Cited by72 opinions

  1. Crocker v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1978
  2. Cheney v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1988
  3. United States v. Tom Welch, Charles Cashell, William L. Satterwhite and James M. CochranCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1981
  4. Mills v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  5. Stinnett v. Williamson County Sheriff's DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1993

67 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