Ex Parte Marks

Full title: EX PARTE NICK MARKS

Court: Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Oct 21, 1942

165 S.W.2d 184 (Tex. Crim. App. 1942)

165 S.W.2d 184

Opinion

No. 22287.

Delivered October 21, 1942.

Appeal Bond — "Moot Question."

Where it appeared that the judgment of conviction of relator had been affirmed and his motion for rehearing overruled, and the judgment had become final, relator's appeal from an order in habeas corpus proceedings, refusing to reduce his appeal bond, was dismissed as presenting a "moot question."

Appeal from District Court of Ellis County. Hon. A. R. Stout, Judge.

Habeas corpus proceedings by relator to secure a reduction of an appeal bond. From an order refusing a reduction relator appeals.

Dismissed.

The opinion states the case.

Shelton Shelton, of Austin, and Byron Matthews and Will R. Parker, both of Fort Worth, for appellant.

Forrester Hancock, District Attorney, and Fred L. Wilson, Assistant District Attorney, both of Waxahachie, and Spurgeon E. Bell, State's Attorney, of Austin, for the State.

HAWKINS, Presiding Judge.

The relator brings this case on appeal from the District Court of Ellis County, in which he sought a reduction of his appeal bond from eight thousand dollars to two thousand five hundred dollars. The bond was sought in connection with an appeal to this court in cause No. 21,854. (Page 509 of this volume.) He had previously sought a reduction of bail and this court affirmed the action of the trial court in fixing bail at eight thousand dollars. See ex parte Marks, 54 S.W.2d 851. Relator subsequently obtained another writ of habeas corpus seeking a reduction of said appeal bond, and upon reduction still being refused by the district court relator appealed in this present proceeding.

The judgment of conviction in cause No. 21,854 was affirmed prior to the adjournment of court in June, 1942, and a motion for rehearing therein on behalf of appellant was overruled on October 14, 1942.

The State, by a motion to dismiss the appeal, calls attention to the facts heretofore recited, which shows that the question here sought to be passed upon is moot by reason of the final judgment of conviction in cause No. 21,854.

The State's motion is granted and the appeal herein is dismissed.