Ex parte Sadler, 27913
| Decision Date | 02 November 1955 |
| Docket Number | No. 27913,27913 |
| Parties | Ex parte Louis 'Buddy' SADLER. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
Harkness & Friedman, by Harry Friedman, Texarkana, for appellant.
Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
On the 30th day of October, 1936, relator was convicted in the district court of Cass County of the offense of robbery and his punishment assessed at twenty-five years' confinement in the penitentiary, the cause number being 7671 on the docket of that court.
On December 11, 1936, or approximately forty-five days after the Cass County conviction, relator, upon his plea of guilty, was convicted in the district court of Red River County, of the offense of robbery and his punishment assessed at twenty-five years' confinement in the penitentiary. Attached to and as a part of that sentence is the following order:
'Sentence to begin 10 years from date of sentence in Cass County in Cause No. 7671, October 30, 1936, the State of Texas v. Buddy Sadler in District Court of Cass County, wherein his punishment was assessed at 25 years in the State Penitentiary.'
The penitentiary authorities construe the two sentences as fixing appellant's punishment at a total of thirty-five years in the penitentiary.
Relator is now credited with having served more than twenty-five years in the penitentiary.
It is his contention that the ten-year cumulation of the Red River County conviction is void, that the two sentences run concurrently, and that he is entitled to his discharge from custody. He seeks that relief by writ of habeas corpus, under the provisions of Art. 119, C.C.P., as amended, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P. art. 119.
If that contention is correct, he is entitled to his discharge; otherwise, he is not.
The order attempting to cumulate ten years of the Red River County conviction, if otherwise valid, is deemed sufficiently definite and certain.
The court, the number of the case, and the name of the convict are all clearly stated and deemed sufficient. Ex parte Bobbitt, 159 Tex.Cr.R. 213, 262 S.W.2d 416; Ex parte Collier, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 377, 243 S.W.2d 177; Ex parte Meadows, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 417, 243 S.W.2d 169.
The other question presented is, however, more troublesome. This has reference to the action of the district judge in Red River County in cumulating only ten years of the twenty-five-year sentence imposed. May this be lawfully done? A construction of Art. 774, C.C.P., is called for.
That article provides that sentences may be cumulated 'when the judgment and sentence in the preceding conviction has ceased to operate'.
Unless sentences are cumulated, they run concurrently. Ex parte Baird, 154 Tex.Cr.R. 109, 225 S.W.2d 845; Ex parte Crossone, 155 Tex.Cr.R. 129, 232 S.W.2d 855.
It becomes material to ascertain whether the ten-year delay in the taking effect of the Red River County sentence was in fact an order of cumulation or, rather, if it was an order suspending the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Morris v. State
...to determine retrospectively that appellant's amnesia did not, under Jackson v. State,5 deprive him of a fair trial; and (3) under Ex parte Sadler,6 the trial judge erred in partially cumulating count III, so it reformed the stacking order to show that count III runs concurrent with count W......
-
Moore v. State
...Knipp, 236 S.W.3d 214, 215 n. 2 (Tex.Crim.App.2007); Ex parte Hernandez, 758 S.W.2d 594, 596 (Tex.Crim.App.1988); Ex parte Sadler, 283 S.W.2d 235, 236–37 (Tex.Crim.App.1955). 10. We have explained the rationale for this rule: [T]he imposition of sentence is the crucial moment when all of th......
-
Morris v. State
.... TEX.CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 42.08(a) (Vernon Supp.2006).11 (11) The issue now before us was resolved in Ex parte Sadler, 162 Tex.Crim. 170, 283 S.W.2d 235 (Tex.Crim.App.1955). In reviewing article 774 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the statute from which article 42.08 is derived, t......
-
Ex parte Huerta
...185, 187 (Tex.Cr.App.1976), and cases there cited. See also Ex parte Ward, 161 Tex.Cr.R. 64, 274 S.W.2d 693 (1955); Ex parte Sadler, 162 Tex.Cr.R. 170, 283 S.W.2d 235 (1955). This rule is applicable whether the other convictions are in federal and state courts or in state courts only. Ex pa......