Ex Parte Matthews
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
1ConcurrenceBaird, Judge
At issue in the instant case is the statutory interpretation of Tex.Code Crim. Proe. Ann. art. 12.05(a), which provides:
The time during which the accused is absent from the state shall not be computed in the period of limitation.1
I
In Boykin v. State, 818 S.W.2d 782 (Tex.Cr.App.1991), we stated the “lawmaking” function is assigned to the Legislature and the “law interpreting” function is assigned to the judiciary. Tex. Const, art. II, § 1. In discharging this assignment, the judiciary “seek[s] to effectuate the ‘collective’ intent or purpose of the legislators who enacted the legislation.”…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Boykin v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Michigan v. JacksonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. DaughertyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1996
- Dillehey v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1991
- Holloway v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1989
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.