From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ex Parte Preston

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 3, 1976
533 S.W.2d 820 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)

Opinion

No. 51451.

March 3, 1976.

Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1, Tarrant County, Byron Matthews, J.

Peter Gilgeather, Ft. Worth, for appellant.

Tim Curry, Dist. Atty., Howard M. Fender, Asst. Dist. Atty., Fort Worth, Jim D. Vollers, State's Atty., and David S. McAngus, Asst. State's Atty., Austin, for the State.


OPINION


This is an appeal from an order entered in a habeas corpus proceeding in Criminal District Court No. 1, Tarrant County, on July 8, 1975, denying the relief requested.

Appellant contends that the court erred in not ordering the release of appellant for lack of probable cause to believe an offense had been committed.

It has been duly brought to our attention that the appellant is now under indictment for murder in this case. The return of an indictment establishes probable cause as a matter of law. Therefore, the question of probable cause to hold appellant has been rendered moot. Ex parte Sellers, Tex.Cr.App., 516 S.W.2d 665; Ex parte White, Tex.Cr.App., 486 S.W.2d 301.

We call attention to Ex parte Johnston, 533 S.W.2d 349 (Tex.Cr.App. 1976), holding that the return of an indictment does not render moot an appeal from a habeas corpus proceeding to set or reduce the amount of bail.

The appeal is dismissed.

Opinion approved by the Court.


Summaries of

Ex Parte Preston

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
Mar 3, 1976
533 S.W.2d 820 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)
Case details for

Ex Parte Preston

Case Details

Full title:Ex parte Monroe Henry PRESTON

Court:Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Date published: Mar 3, 1976

Citations

533 S.W.2d 820 (Tex. Crim. App. 1976)

Citing Cases

Lee v. State

Appellate courts are prohibited from deciding moot controversies. See Ex parte Preston, 533 S.W.2d 820, 821…

Ex Parte Vasquez

As to the circumstances under which the offense was committed, there was also little evidence offered. While…