State Ex Rel. Holmes v. Honorable Court of Appeals for the Third District
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1Concurring in part, dissenting in part · WhiteWhite, Judge
I
I agree with the majority that we should sustain relators’ first, second, and third contentions, and find relators are entitled to a writ of mandamus to compel the vacation of respondent’s injunction. I believe respondent does not have the jurisdiction to enjoin the execution of Gary Graham, which would be an unlawful interference with the mandate of this Court. To decide otherwise, would be the dangerous precedent of permitting lower courts to interfere with the mandates of this Court whenever they perceive it to be necessary in a civil lawsuit. I therefore join Parts I and II of the…
Also in this document: Concurring in part, dissenting in part · Overstreet.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Herrera v. CollinsSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Garcia v. DialCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1980
- Perkins v. Court of Appeals for Third Supreme Judicial District of TexasCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1987
- Stearnes v. ClintonCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1989
- State Ex Rel. Wilson v. BriggsCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1961
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.