Ex Parte Young
Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partDavid Gaultney, Justice
I concur with denying relief, but for different reasons. The complaint made to this Court is that the trial court refuses to permit a pro se application for writ of habeas corpus because of hybrid representation. In the application filed with the trial court, defendant says, among many other things, that he is being held illegally on a cash bond requirement. He asks this *278Court to exercise our original jurisdiction, because the trial court’s duty to issue the writ of habeas corpus is ministerial. See Tex.R.Apr P. 52 (original jurisdiction); see also Tex.Code Crim. Peoo. ANN. art. 11.15 (Vernon…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial District Court of Appeals at TexarkanaCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2007
- Wright v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 5th District (Dallas)1998
- Ex Parte HargettCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Schilb v. KuebelSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District of TexasCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1987
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.