Swanson v. State
| Decision Date | 02 March 1960 |
| Docket Number | No. 31468,31468 |
| Citation | 334 S.W.2d 179,169 Tex.Crim. 390 |
| Parties | George SWANSON et al., Appellants, v. STATE of Texas, Appellee. |
| Court | Texas Court of Criminal Appeals |
P. P. Ballowe, Dallas, for appellant.
Henry Wade, Criminal Dist. Atty., Phil Burleson, John J. Fagan, Assts. Dist. Atty., Dallas, and Leon B. Douglas, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.
Appellants were sureties upon the appearance bond of George Swanson in two criminal cases. Judgment nisi was entered in each case when the defendant failed to appear, and in each case the judgment was made final in September 1957.
Appellants, as plaintiffs, brought suit against the Sheriff, Criminal District Attorney and District Clerk of Dallas County on April 8, 1959, and alleged in paragraph 5 of their petition:
'Plaintiffs further show that the Defendants herein are seeking to treat said judgments as valid and binding on these Plaintiffs, and that although time for appeal or writ of error from such judgments have long since passed and Plaintiffs have no remedy by appeal, nonetheless, said judgments on their face being void, are subject to either or both collateral and direct attack, and for that reason, Plaintiffs bring this action to have said judgments declared null and void and to restrain the Defendants from attempting to enforce said judgments against them by execution or otherwise.'
Neither George Swanson nor the State was made a party to the injunction suit.
After hearing, the trial court entered judgment which reads, in part:
'Be it remembered that on this the 2nd day of October, 1959, came on to be heard the suit filed by sureties E. Colley Sullivan and M. E. Fields by which they sought to have declared null and void the final judgments rendered in each of the foregoing bond forfeiture proceedings, and sought to have the Court issue an injunction permanently enjoining the state of Texas, Bill Shaw, the District Clerk of Dallas County, and Henry Wade, the Criminal District Attorney of Dallas County, from any further efforts to collect the final judgments in each of the above cases, and all parties appeared in person and by attorney and announced ready for trial (said two causes being consolidated and tried as one by agreement of the parties, since they involve the same legal question), and the Court having heard the pleadings, the evidence and argument of counsel, is of the opinion that the surety plaintiffs are not entitled to any relief, and that their suit...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Basaldua v. State
...480 (1935); Hodges v. State, 73 Tex.Cr.R. 638, 165 S.W. 607 (1913); Jeter v. State, 86 Tex. 555, 26 S.W. 49 (1894); Swanson v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 390, 334 S.W.2d 179 (1960). The Court of Criminal Appeals will not exceed its jurisdiction as stated in 15 Tex.Jur.2d, Courts, § 23, p. ". . . ......
-
Houlihan v. State
...v. State, 29 S.W.2d 349, 350 (Tex.Cr.App.1930). See also Bretz v. State, 508 S.W.2d 97 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Swanson v. State (169 Tex.Cr.R. 390, 334 S.W.2d 179 (1960)), supra." While Basaldua was decided before the constitutional Writ jurisdiction of this court was expanded 2 by the November ......
-
Walker v. State, 51853
...cases is restricted by statute to appeals or writs of error from a final judgment forfeiting the bail bond. Swanson v. State,169 Tex.Cr.R. 390, 334 S.W.2d 179 (1960). With this background we must determine if this court has jurisdiction of the instant case. First, it is clear that it is not......
-
Armes v. State, 58902
...to hear an appeal of the matter. Walker v. State, supra; Bretz v. State, 508 S.W.2d 97 (Tex.Cr.App.1974); Swanson v. State, 169 Tex.Cr.R. 390, 334 S.W.2d 179 (1960). Art. 24.28, supra, by its terms does not provide for a right of appeal from the district court's order; we find no statutory ......