Chambers v. Baldwin

Decision Date28 April 1926
Docket Number(No. 625-4483.)
Citation282 S.W. 793
PartiesCHAMBERS v. BALDWIN.
CourtTexas Supreme Court

Suit by E. B. Chambers against Wyatt Baldwin. A judgment dissolving a temporary restraining order was affirmed by the Court of Civil Appeals (274 S. W. 1011), and plaintiff brings error. Reversed and rendered.

Robbins, Edwards & Bailey, of Clarksville, for plaintiff in error.

Edgar Wright, of Paris, for defendant in error.

POWELL, P. J.

The nature and result of this case in the trial court have been admirably stated by the Court of Civil Appeals as follows:

"In November, 1924, the appellee, Wyatt Baldwin, was elected district attorney for the Sixth judicial district, composed of Fannin, Lamar, and Red River counties. At the time of his election and qualification, and at the time this suit was instituted, Mr. Baldwin resided in Lamar county. In February, 1925, the Thirty-Ninth Legislature passed an act (chapter 16) creating the 102d judicial district, composed of Red River and Bowie counties. Acts 1925, c. 16. Red River county was taken out of the Sixth judicial district, and the Sixth judicial district was continued to be thereafter composed only of the counties of Lamar and Fannin. Bowie county was already in the Fifth judicial district, and the creation of the 102d district gave that county two district courts. The act contained the following provisions:

"`Section 2. Immediately after this act takes effect the Governor shall appoint some suitable person as judge of the 102d judicial district court who shall hold said office until the next general election for state and county officers, and until the election and qualification of his successor in office.

"`Section 3. The clerk of the district court of Bowie county, Texas, as heretofore constituted, and his successors in office, shall be the clerk of both the Fifth judicial district court and of the 102d judicial district court in Bowie county hereby created, and shall perform all the duties of the clerk of both courts in Bowie county. * * *

"`Section 8. The district attorney of the Sixth judicial district shall prosecute all criminal cases in the 102d judicial district court while sitting in Red River county until the expiration of his present term of office and thereafter the county attorney of Red River county shall prosecute all criminal cases in the district court of the 102d judicial district and shall represent the state in all matters wherein the state is a party, and shall receive such fees for his services as is now, or may hereafter be provided by the general laws of the state of Texas.'

"The appellant, E. B. Chambers, was duly elected county attorney of Red River county in November, 1924, and qualified in January, 1925. He is claiming the right to represent the state in criminal prosecutions in the district court of the 102d judicial district while sitting in Red River county, and to receive the legal fees therefor. In May, 1925, he filed in the district court of the 102d judicial district his petition seeking an injunction restraining Wyatt Baldwin from further representing the state in criminal prosecutions in the district court since the transfer of Red River county to the 102d judicial district. A temporary restraining order was granted, and upon final trial it was dissolved by the court. This appeal is by the appellant to revise the ruling of the court."

The Court of Civil Appeals affirmed the judgment of the district court. See 274 S. W. 1011.

The Legislature had a perfect right to change the Sixth judicial district by taking Red River county therefrom. Section 7 of article 5 of our Constitution provides, in part, as follows:

"The state shall be divided into as many judicial districts as may now or hereafter be provided by law, which may be increased or diminished by law. For each district there shall be elected by the qualified voters thereof, at a general election, a judge, who shall be a citizen of the United States and of this state, who shall have been a practicing lawyer of this state, or a judge of a court in this state, for four years next preceding his election; who shall have resided in the district in which he was elected for two years next preceding his election; who shall reside in his district during his term of office; who shall hold his office for the period of four years, and shall receive for his services an annual salary of two thousand five hundred dollars, until otherwise changed by law. He shall hold the regular terms of his court at the county seat of each county in his district at least twice in each year, in such manner as may be prescribed by law."

The duties of the county attorney are prescribed in section 21 of article 5 of our Constitution, reading as follows:

"A county attorney, for counties in which there is not a resident criminal district attorney, shall be elected by the qualified voters of each county, who shall be commissioned by the governor, and hold his office for the term of two years. In case of vacancy the commissioners' court of the county shall have power to appoint a county attorney until the next general election. The county attorneys shall represent the state in all cases in the district and inferior courts in their respective counties; but, if any county shall be included in a district in which there shall be a district attorney, the respective duties of district...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Kelly v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 4 d3 Fevereiro d3 1987
    ...judicial district." Chambers v. Baldwin, 274 S.W. 1011, 1013 (Tex.Civ.App.-Texarkana 1925), reversed on other grounds, Chambers v. Baldwin, 282 S.W. 793 (Tex.1926). And past Legislatures have so acted. Article 199, V.A.C.S., provided for 180 Judicial Districts in this State. Art. 199a, V.A.......
  • Powell v. State
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • 30 d3 Novembro d3 1994
    ...of § 41.103 and related sections, ante, at 824, n. 1.9 Appellant seeks support for his contention and argument from Chambers v. Baldwin, 282 S.W. 793, 795 (Comm.App.1926), and Irwin v. State, 147 Tex.Crim. 6, 177 S.W.2d 970, at 974 (1944).While the majority pretermits discussion of Chambers......
  • Baldwin v. Chambers
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • 19 d4 Fevereiro d4 1931
    ...to April 28, 1926, when it was finally determined that Chambers and not Baldwin was entitled to so represent the state. Chambers v. Baldwin (Tex. Com. App.) 282 S. W. 793. The court found, further, that during the time specified Chambers was ready, willing, and able to perform the services ......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT