From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex Parte Brager

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Feb 12, 1986
704 S.W.2d 46 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)

Summary

holding that attacks on prison disciplinary convictions are not cognizable on state habeas review

Summary of this case from Barton v. Stephens

Opinion

No. 69524.

February. 12, 1986.

Appeal from the 349th Judicial District Court, Houston County, Melvin D. Whitaker, J.

Emmit Brager, pro se.

Robert Huttash, State's Atty., Austin, for the State.

Before the court en banc.

OPINION


Applicant filed this cause as an application for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Art. 11.07, V.A.C.C.P. Applicant alleges numerous violations of prison disciplinary procedures by Texas Department of Correction officials. He alleges, inter alia, that these violations resulted in a loss of good time on his sentence.

If we were treating this as an application under Art. 11.07., V.A.C.C.P., we would dismiss for lack of jurisdiction because applicant did not comply with Art. 11.07, Sec. 2, and file this application in the county in which he was convicted for the offense for which he is now incarcerated. See Ex Parte Woodward, 619 S.W.2d 179 (Tex.Cr.App. 1981).

We treat this cause as an original application for writ of habeas corpus pursuant to Art. V, Sec. 5 of the Texas Constitution, simply to state that this Court will not entertain claims concerning alleged violations of prison disciplinary procedures. Relief is denied.

ONION, P.J., concurs in result.


Summaries of

Ex Parte Brager

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc
Feb 12, 1986
704 S.W.2d 46 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)

holding that attacks on prison disciplinary convictions are not cognizable on state habeas review

Summary of this case from Barton v. Stephens

holding that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Foley v. Cockrell

holding that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Lopez v. Cockrell

holding that Texas state courts will not entertain habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Evans v. Eldridge

concluding that Texas state courts will not entertain habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Evans v. Hernandez

concluding that state courts will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Ex Parte McBride

concluding state courts will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Smith v. TDCJ-CID

concluding state courts will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Garner v. TDCJ-CID

concluding state courts will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from White v. TX DCJC

concluding state courts will not entertain state habeas actions challenging violations of prison disciplinary procedures

Summary of this case from Jones v. TDCJ-CID

In Ex parte Brager, 704 S.W.2d 46 (Tex.Crim.App. 1986), the Court stated in dicta in a footnote that an application under Art. 11.07 which is not presented to the district clerk in the county in which the conviction is entered should be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Summary of this case from Ex Parte Alexander

refusing to "entertain claims concerning alleged violations of prison disciplinary procedures"

Summary of this case from McCoy v. Wainwright
Case details for

Ex Parte Brager

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte Emmit BRAGER

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc

Date published: Feb 12, 1986

Citations

704 S.W.2d 46 (Tex. Crim. App. 1986)

Citing Cases

Ex Parte Alexander

On the other hand, when an application is presented to a district clerk in a county in which the challenged…

Canida v. Quarterman

See O'Sullivan v. Boerckel, 526 U.S. 838, 842-48 (1999); Carter v. Estelle, 677 F.2d 427, 443-44 (5th Cir.…