Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Smith v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided May 16, 1990No. 1432-88Published

1ConcurrenceClinton, Judge

There is a fundamental misconception underlying the reasoning of the court of appeals, viz:

“Further, the language in the statute giving the trial court jurisdiction for 180 days 'from the date the execution of the sentence actually begins’ means the date the sentence is pronounced.”

Smith v. State, 762 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st] 1988), at 236-237. For me it is clear enough the Legislature neither provided nor intended that phrase be thus construed. Williamson v. State, 676 S.W.2d 428 (Tex.Cr.App.1984) (dissenting opinion, at 429-430).

“The ‘shock’ is being incarcerated in a penitentiary…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Houlihan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1979
  2. Tamez v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
  3. Adams v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1981
  4. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Texas · 1988
  5. Williamson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1984

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API