TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Montalvo v. State

Salvador Montalvo v. the State

Montalvo v. State, 272 S.W. 130 (Tex. Crim. App. 1925)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
May 6, 1925
Docket
No. 9422.
Judges
Hawkins
Citations
272 S.W. 130100 Tex. Crim. 5601925 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 576
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 — Hawkins

HAWKINS, Judge. — Conviction is for the murder of Remigio Garza. Punishment, 20 years in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without statement of facts or bills of exception. An objection was lodged to the charge because it omitted any instruction on the issue of manslaughter. Without knowing what facts were proven, we are unable to appraise this objection. The explanation of the learned trial judge why he did not charge on “manslaughter” is satisfactory, and will bind this court in the absence of a showing that his reasons are unsupported by the facts.

After adjournment of the term of court at which the conviction occurred, defendant undertook to raise by habeas corpus proceedings the question of a juror’s disqualification. The record on that proceeding is before us without any certificate thereto by the trial judge, and therefore may not be considered. Art. 950, C. C. P.; Ex parte Lozano, 88 Texas Crim. Rep. 112 , 225 S. W. Rep. 59 . The appeal from the order refusing the writ of habeas corpus is ordered dismissed. (See cases collated under See. 243, Branch’s Ann. Tex. P. C.). This is a matter which cannot be raised for the first time by habeas corpus proceeding after conviction, and even if presented on regular appeal, if the point was not raised until after conviction, it seems to be settled that it will not ordinarily vitiate the verdict. (Authorities under Sec. 550 and 551. Branch’s Ann. Texas P. C., and note 53, p. 381, Vernon’s Crim. Stat. Vol. 2.)

The judgment of conviction is affirmed.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

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

1952: 119522026peak 1952 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ex Parte Bronson254 S.W.2d 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 1952)

Most recent

  1. Ex Parte Bronson254 S.W.2d 117 (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 1

DepthCaseCited by
Ex Parte Lozano, 225 S.W. 59 (Tex. Crim. App. 1920) 7

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