TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ex Parte Lee Scott

Ex Parte Lee Scott.

Ex Parte Lee Scott, 218 S.W. 366 (Tex. Crim. App. 1920)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 4, 1920
Docket
No. 5630.
Judges
Morrow
Citations
218 S.W. 36686 Tex. Crim. 5911920 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 61
Headnotes
Habeas Corpus—Indictment—Detention of Relator. Where relator claimed release from custody, upon the ground that the evidence was insufficient to authorize his detention after an examining trial, and it appeared to this court that pending this appeal the grand jury had found a bill of indictment against him for the offense upon which he was committed, the appeal will be dismissed.
Summary
The opinion states the case.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Morrow

MORROW, Judge.

—This is an appeal from the order of the District Court refusing to release the relator from custody. It appears from the order of the district judge that the relator had been held by the examining court under $1000 bail to await the action of the grand jury. The bad was reduced by the district judge to $300. The release is sought upon the ground that the evidence was insufficient to authorize the detention of the relator. We will not inquire into that question, for the reason that it has been duly made to appear here that pending this appeal the grand jury has found a bill of indictment against the relator, charging him with the offense of assault with intent to murder, this charge growing out of the same alleged offense that was the foundation for the complaint which was before the District Court.

The relator now being held under the indictment, and not under the -process issued on the complaint, is not in position to demand his release, and following the precedents established by this court, the appeal is dismissed.

Dismissed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1952: 11976: 119522026peak 1952 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ex Parte Alaniz251 S.W.2d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952)
  2. Ex parte Johnston533 S.W.2d 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)

Most recent

  1. Ex parte Johnston533 S.W.2d 349 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)
  2. Ex Parte Alaniz251 S.W.2d 738 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952)

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 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

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