Ex parte Tucker

Decision Date27 May 1959
Docket NumberNo. 30766,30766
Citation168 Tex.Crim. 286,324 S.W.2d 853
PartiesEx parte Sally Virginia TUCKER.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Ivan Irwin, Pete White, Clay C. Scott, Jr., Dallas, for appellant.

Henry Wade, Criminal Dist. Atty., A. D. Jim Bowie, Jack Pevehouse, John Fagan, Merle Flagg, Asst. Dist. Attys., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

BELCHER, Commissioner.

This is an appeal from an order entered in a habeas corpus proceeding remanding appellant to custody for extradition to the State of Pennsylvania.

The executive warrant of the Governor of Texas was introduced in evidence.

It recited that the Governor of the State of Pennsylvania had demanded the arrest and delivery of the appellant to an agent of Pennsylvania for return to said state; and it further recited that the appellant stood charged by indictment with the commission of the crime of 'Libel on Candidates and Conspiracy' in said state and had taken refuge in Texas, and that said demand was accompanied by a copy of said indictment duly certified as authentic by the governor of said state.

Appellant contends that the failure to furnish her with properly authenticated duplicate copies of the instruments provided for in Section 3 of Art. 1008a, Vernon's Ann.C.C.P., requires her discharge.

At the hearing and before the court had called for the announcement of ready by the parties, appellant informed the court that she had made demand for the instruments to which she is entitled under Section 3, and that she had not received them.

Appellant strenuously insisted that she was not ready to proceed with the hearing on the writ of habeas corpus until she had received said instruments.

The court proceeded with the hearing over appellant's objections that she had not received said instruments and to such action of the court she excepted.

There is no affirmative showing that the appellant was ever furnished with or came into possession of said instruments.

The courts of this state may go behind the governor's warrant in order to examine and review the grounds upon which he may have issued it. 1 Branch's Ann.P.C.2d 308, Sec. 270.

When the extradition warrant issued by the governor of this state is sufficient on its face and introduced in evidence, the burden is then on the accused to show that the warrant was not legally issued. 1 Branch's Ann.P.C.2d 309, Sec. 270.

Here, the governor's warrant, alone, was introduced in evidence, and its recitals in substance are set out above. The state did not introduce any instruments from the demanding state.

The right of the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • Ex parte Cain
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 23, 1980
    ...of the Texas Governor and challenge their sufficiency in order to show that the warrant was not legally issued. Ex parte Tucker, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 286, 324 S.W.2d 853 (1959); Ex parte Goodwin, 384 S.W.2d 874 (Tex.Cr.App.1964); Ex parte Kronhaus, Supra. However, the accused cannot complain about......
  • Ex parte Kronhaus, 40013
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • January 11, 1967
    ...described therein. A failure to furnish such papers upon request is reversible error. Ex parte Holmes, 397 S.W.2d 458; Ex parte Tucker, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 286, 324 S.W.2d 853. There is no showing that the appellant was denied such papers. This Court has held that the accused opposing extradition......
  • Ex parte Davenport
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Appeals
    • October 22, 1986
    ...of the supporting papers accompanying the warrant. Ex parte Goodwin, 384 S.W.2d 874, 875 (Tex.Crim.App.1964); Ex parte Tucker, 168 Tex.Crim.R. 286, 324 S.W.2d 853, 854 (1959). If we accept Davenport's position, the State would be forced to introduce not only the Governor's Warrant, but also......
  • Ex parte Lippincott, 46241
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • December 6, 1972
    ...described therein. A failure to furnish such papers upon request is reversible error. Ex parte Holmes, 397 S.W.2d 458; Ex parte Tucker, 168 Tex.Cr.R. 286, 324 S.W.2d 853.' The transcription of the court reporter's notes does not reflect that appellant made a request for the supporting paper......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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