Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Kelly v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided February 4, 1987No. 439-85Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partClinton, Judge

As broad as the exception is in Article III, Sec. 56 — “except as otherwise provided in this Constitution,” the Legislature shall not pass any local or special law authorizing matters therein proscribed — it does not admit evasion on the theory asserted by the State and accepted by the court of appeals, viz:

“The State contends that this section [1, art. V], rather than art. Ill, § 56, is controlling in this case. We agree. We hold that art. 1918c is not an unconstitutional ‘local or special law,’ in violation of art. Ill, § 56. The Legislature is authorized by art. V., § 1 to create courts…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Ex Parte StaceyCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1986
  2. Harris County v. StewartTexas Supreme Court · 1897
  3. Ex Parte TowlesTexas Supreme Court · 1877
  4. Kelley v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984
  5. Jordan v. CrudgingtonTexas Supreme Court · 1950

13 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