TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Emmitt Alfred Ballard v. The State of Texas

Emmitt Alfred BALLARD, Petitioner-Appellant, v. the STATE OF TEXAS, Respondent-Appellee

Emmitt Alfred Ballard v. Texas, 438 F.2d 640 (5th Cir. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
February 8, 1971
Docket
No. 30239
Judges
Gewin, Goldberg, Dyer
Citations
438 F.2d 6401971 U.S. App. LEXIS 11981

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

This appeal is taken from an order of the district court denying the petition of a Texas state convict for a writ of ha-beas corpus. We affirm.

Appellant, represented by court-appointed counsel, was convicted by a jury of fondling a child and was sentenced to 15 years imprisonment. His direct appeal is now pending in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals.

Bail pending appeal was set by the trial court at $30,000. Appellant filed a petition for the writ of habeas corpus in that court for reduction of bail. While that petition was pending appellant petitioned the Court of Criminal Appeals for a writ of mandamus instructing the trial court to hold a hearing on his ha-beas petition. Mandamus was denied, and the trial court denied the habeas petition. Appellant then applied to the Court of Criminal Appeals' for habeas corpus and reduction of bond, which motion was denied.

Appellant then applied to the federal district court seeking reduction of bond. The district court denied relief without holding an evidentiary hearing, and we affirm.

There is no absolute right to bail pending appeal. Grech v. Purdy, 5 Cir. 1970, 426 F.2d 304 ; United States ex rel. Fink v. Heyd, 5 Cir. 1969, 408 F.2d 7 , cert. denied, 396 U.S. 895 , 90 S.Ct. 192 , 24 L.Ed.2d 172 ; Sellers v. Georgia, 5 Cir. 1967, 374 F.2d 84 . There being *641 no exceptional circumstances present in this case, we will not interfere with the state courts’ determination as to the amount of bail which will ensure a defendant’s presence while his appeal is pending. See Fink v. Heyd, supra; Sellers v. Georgia, supra.

The judgment below is affirmed.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 12 cases

View all citing references →
1971: 21972: 11977: 11981: 11982: 21986: 12001: 12015: 22021: 119712026peak 1971 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Shockley v. State717 S.W.2d 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)
  2. Nixon, ClevelandNo. PD-1158-15 (Tex. App. Sept. 22, 2015)
  3. Nixon, ClevelandNo. PD-1158-15 (Tex. App. Sept. 9, 2015)
  4. King v. East451 F. Supp. 453 (N.D. Miss. 1977)
  5. Ex Parte Anderer61 S.W.3d 398 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
  6. Ex Parte Williams630 S.W.2d 803 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1982)

Most recent

  1. Hallman v. The State of TexasNo. 4:20-cv-00686 (N.D. Tex. Feb. 10, 2021)
  2. Nixon, ClevelandNo. PD-1158-15 (Tex. App. Sept. 22, 2015)
  3. Nixon, ClevelandNo. PD-1158-15 (Tex. App. Sept. 9, 2015)
  4. Ex Parte Anderer61 S.W.3d 398 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001)
  5. Shockley v. State717 S.W.2d 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)
  6. Wilcox v. Carter545 F. Supp. 1043 (M.D. Ga. 1982)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 3

DepthCaseCited by
United States ex rel. Stephen Fink v. Heyd, 408 F.2d 7 (5th Cir. 1969) 29
Foster Sellers v. Georgia, 374 F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1967) 17
Grech v. E. W. Purdy, as Sheriff of Metro. Dade Cnty., 426 F.2d 304 (5th Cir. 1970) 5

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list