Ex Parte Sparks

• Decision Date: 26 October 1921
• Docket Number: (No. 6477.)
• Citation: 234 S.W. 393
• Parties: Ex parte SPARKS.
• Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals

234 S.W. 393

Ex parte SPARKS.

(No. 6477.)

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

October 26, 1921.

Original application for writ of habeas corpus by Oscar Sparks. Application dismissed.

Y. D. Harrison, of Marshall, Julian P. Harrison, of El Paso, and H. T. Lyttleton and Davidson & Blalock, all of Marshall, for appellant.

R. G. Storey, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

MORROW, P. J.

The appellant, after conviction of a felony, was placed in custody of John F. Womack by proclamation of the Governor, reciting that, for certain reasons filed with the Secretary of State, he granted Oscar Sparks a parole "conditioned on his good behavior and observance of the law and rules under which said application for parole was made," and further stating that the Board of Prison Commissioners had investigated the facts surrounding the case, and had recommended that the application of relator to be permitted to go outside of the prison inclosures and remain within the bounds of the state of Texas, subject to the rules of parole as provided by the Board of Prison Commissioners, be granted. Subsequently, Governor Neff, by proclamation reciting that Oscar Sparks had broken the terms of the parole, and that he had satisfactory reasons for so doing, revoked the parole theretofore granted and directed that Sparks be taken into custody and confined in the penitentiary pending the expiration of his term of sentence. Sparks later sought his release by application for writ of habeas corpus presented to the Honorable P. O. Beard, judge of the district court of Harrison county, in which application he averred that his restraint was illegal in that he had breached no permit, rule, or regulation upon which he had enjoyed his liberty and further than that he was a subject of physical defects which rendered his confinement dangerous to his life.

The cause was heard and the relator remanded to custody by order of the district judge. Notice of appeal was given, but, so far as we are aware, the record on appeal has not reached this court. The matter is here upon an original application for habeas corpus revealing the facts herein recited and challenging the legality of his detention. The application was filed here during vacation, and relator sought release on bail pending the hearing of said appeal. The judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals heard argument concerning the matter during vacation and declined the request for bail. In so doing, we acted in consonance with our...