Ex Parte Wade, 22849.

Decision Date15 March 1944
Docket NumberNo. 22849.,22849.
Citation178 S.W.2d 690
PartiesEx parte WADE.
CourtTexas Court of Criminal Appeals

Appeal from District Court, Upshur County; Otis T. Dunagan, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceeding by Jim Wade.Order refusing to issue the writ, and the applicant appeals.

Appeal dismissed.

Mat Davis, of Gilmer, for appellant.

Ernest S. Goens, State's Atty., of Austin, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This is a habeas corpus proceeding.The disposition made thereof in the trial court as shown by the judgment entered, is as follows: "It is, therefore, Ordered and Adjudged that the application of the Petitioner, Jim Wade, herein be denied and issuance of writ as applied for refused; to which action and judgment of the Courtthe Petitioner then and there in open court excepted and gave notice of appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, at Austin, Texas."Such order is nothing more nor less than a refusal to issue the writ of habeas corpus, and is not such a final judgment as will authorize an appeal to this court.Ex parte Noble, Tex.Cr. App., 176 S.W.2d 951.

The appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM.

...

To continue reading

Request your trial

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex

Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial

Transform your legal research with vLex

  • Complete case access with no limitations or restrictions

  • AI-generated case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues

  • Comprehensive legal database spanning 100+ countries and all 50 states

  • Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options

  • Verified citations and treatment with CERT citator technology

vLex
5 cases
  • Ex parte Renier
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • July 1, 1987
    ...including those arising in habeas corpus. 4 As always, a final judgment or order is a necessary predicate to appeal. Ex parte Wade, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 94, 178 S.W.2d 690 (1944); Ex parte Strong, 34 Tex.Cr.R. 309, 30 S.W. 666 (1895). 5 Since issuance of the writ, as opposed to granting or denying......
  • Ex parte Noe
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • March 1, 1983
    ...do not have jurisdiction in such a situation. Ex parte Nichlos, 245 S.W.2d 704 (Tex.Cr.App.1952). See also Ex parte Wade, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 94, 178 S.W.2d 690 (Tex.Cr.App.1944). Even if it could be argued that this proceeding was appealable, neither this court nor the Court of Appeals has juris......
  • Weiner v. Dial, 69090
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 29, 1983
    ...Note 5. The appellate courts do not have jurisdiction in such cases. Ex parte Nichlos, supra. See also Ex parte Wade, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 94, 178 S.W.2d 690 (Tex.Cr.App.1944); Ex parte Mayes, The pleadings were designated "application for writ of habeas corpus." The application was denied "withou......
  • Ex parte Boehme, 26484
    • United States
    • Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
    • June 17, 1953
    ...court here entered. Ex parte Nichols, Tex.Cr.App., 245 S.W.2d 704; Ex parte Noble, 146 Tex.Cr.R. 575, 176 S.W.2d 951; Ex parte Wade, 147 Tex.Cr.R. 94, 178 S.W.2d 690; Ex parte Montgomery, 153 Tex.Cr.R. 603, 223 S.W.2d This court has authority to issue the writ of mandamus only to enforce it......
  • 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