Ex Parte Burns
| Decision Date | 13 October 1937 |
| Docket Number | No. 19236.,19236. |
| Citation | 109 S.W.2d 211 |
| Parties | Ex parte BURNS. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Appeal from District Court, Smith County; Walter G. Russell, Judge.
Valrie Jordan Burns was convicted of being a delinquent child, and, from a judgment denying her application for writ of habeas corpus, she appeals.
Affirmed.
Gray & Pope, of Tyler, for appellant.
Lloyd W. Davidson, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.
In a trial in the county court of Smith county judgment was entered finding appellant to be a delinquent child and she was sentenced to confinement in the girls' training school at Gainesville. No appeal was taken from the judgment of conviction. Subsequently, by way of habeas corpus, appellant sought her release. After a hearing she was remanded to custody. Hence this appeal.
We understand from the record that it is appellant's contention that the evidence adduced in the county court on her trial for delinquency was insufficient to warrant her conviction. The judgment appears regular. If appellant deemed the evidence insufficient she could have appealed from said judgment. The county court of Smith county had authority to determine whether she was a delinquent child. In Ex parte Davis, 85 Tex.Cr.R. 218, 211 S.W. 456, 457, this court used language as follows: "The authority for holding the relator being under a judgment which, on its face, is regular and against which no direct attack is made, there would be available in the collateral proceeding of a habeas corpus under the record only the question of the jurisdiction of the court to enter the judgment."
We quote further from the opinion: "The court having jurisdiction to render the judgment, and the law affording a remedy by appeal, we are not, in a habeas corpus proceeding, in a position to inquire into questions of procedure in the trial, or the sufficiency of the evidence upon which the judgment was rendered."
The judgment is affirmed.
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.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ex parte Williams
...645 S.W.2d 286 (Tex.Cr.App.1983); Ex parte Gonzales, 667 S.W.2d 932 (Tex.App.--Austin 1984) (review refused). Ex parte Burns, 133 Tex.Cr.R. 77, 109 S.W.2d 211 (1937), made clear that when the trial court has jurisdiction to render judgment and the law affords a remedy by appeal the court ca......
-
Ex Parte Adair
... ... Without such evidence being introduced in the habeas corpus proceeding to show what the court had before it when it committed the defendant for contempt, we cannot say that the original commitment was void. Ex parte Ellerd, 71 Tex.Cr.R. 285, 158 S.W. 1145, Ann.Cas.1916D, 361; Ex parte Burns, 133 Tex.Cr.R. 77, 109 S.W.2d 211 ... This appeal is from the judgment remanding defendant after the hearing of the writ of habeas corpus. On a proceeding in habeas corpus it must appear that the judgment in the original contempt proceeding and the commitment thereunder were void ... ...