TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Ex Parte Landers

Ex Parte Wilson Landers and E. C. Landers.

Ex Parte Landers, 9 S.W.2d 1106 (Tex. Crim. App. 1928)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · State Highest Courts
Decided
October 10, 1928
Docket
Nos. 12221 and 12222.
Judges
Martin
Citations
9 S.W.2d 1106110 Tex. Crim. 6041928 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 711
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 — Martin

MARTIN, Judge.

Charged with murder, relator sued out a writ of habeas corpus and upon a hearing on same by the District Court was denied bail and remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Bell County, frbm which judgment he appeals to this Court.

The facts shown in the record are very meager. It is sufficient to say that at best they only show an unexplained killing. “All prisoners shall be bailable by sufficient sureties, unless for capital offenses when the proof is evident.” Bill of Rights, Sec. 11, State Constitution. - Since the case of Ex parte Newman, 38 Tex. Crim. Rep. 164, this Court has uniformly held that on an application by habeas.corpus for bail, in a capital case, the burden of proof to establish the fact that the proof is evident is not upon relator but upon the State. The rules governing cases of this character have been so frequently stated that any discussion here we feel would be profitless. They will be found clearly stated in Ex parte Littleton, 88 Tex. Crim. Rep. 614. We do not deem it expedient or necessary to discuss this case further than to say that in our opinion the State failed to discharge the burden which the law. places upon it in cases of this character.

Bail is granted relator in the sum of $10,000.00.

Judgment reversed and relator granted bail as aforesaid.

Reversed and bail granted, *605 The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

How later courts describe this case

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

1960: 119602026peak 1960 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. State v. Konigsberg164 A.2d 740 (N.J. 1960)

Most recent

  1. State v. Konigsberg164 A.2d 740 (N.J. 1960)

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