Legal Opinion

Padilla v. McDaniel

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided December 3, 2003No. 20423-05PublishedCited by 105 opinions

1Per curiam

The petitioner alleges that he has been convicted of a criminal offense and imprisoned in the Institutional Division of the Department of Criminal Justice. He has petitioned this court for a writ of mandamus compelling the respondent judge to appoint counsel for him on his motion for forensic DNA testing. 1 At the time that he alleges that he filed his motion, a statute required the convicting court to appoint counsel. 2 Mandamus may lie to compel a district judge to follow the statute. 3 The threshold question is whether this court should be a court of first resort for such original actions…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dickens v. Court of Appeals for the Second Supreme Judicial District of TexasCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1987
  2. Crofts v. Court of Civil Appeals for the Eighth Supreme Judicial DistrictTexas Supreme Court · 1962
  3. Lanford v. Fourteenth Court of AppealsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
  4. Neveu v. CulverCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2003
  5. Bush v. VelaCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1976

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by105 opinions

  1. Ex Parte YbarraCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2004
  2. In re McCannCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
  3. Padieu, Philippe, Relator v. Court of Appeals of Texas, 5th DistrictCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2013
  4. Simon v. LevarioCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2009
  5. Powell v. HockerCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 2017

100 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