Case ID: sw_153/html/0325-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HARPER, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Ex parte COPLEY.
    (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
    Jan. 29, 1913.)
    Habeas Cobpus (§ 113) —Appeal — Denial oe WRIT.
    No appeal can be taken from a refusal to issue a writ of habeas corpus.
    [Ed. Note.—For other cases, see Habeas Corpus, Cent. Dig. §§ 102-115; Dec. Dig. § 113.]
    Appeal from Criminal District Court, Dallas County; Robt. B. Seay, Judge.
    Douglas Copley was convicted of crime. From a refusal of the district court to issue a writ of habeas corpus, he appeals.
    Appeal dismissed.
    J. S. Baker and G. A. Harmon, both of Dallas, for appellant. C. E. Lane, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.
    
      
      For otHer cases see same toDic and section NUMBER in Dec. Dig. & Am. Dig. Key-No. Series & Rep’r Indexes
    
   HARPER, J.

Appellant was tried in the county court of Dallas county, sitting as a juvenile court, and the judgment of the court was that he should be sent to the reform school at Gatesville for four years. We gather these facts from the petition of the relator, presented to Hon. R. B. Seay, judge of the district court of Dallas county, praying for a writ of habeas corpus. Judge Seay refused to issue the writ of habeas corpus, and from this refusal appellant gave notice of appeal to this court.

The first question to be decided is: Has this court any jurisdiction on appeal, where the district court refuses to issue the writ? This may furnish ground to apply to this court for an original writ of habeas corpus, but no such application has been filed. This question was fully discussed and decided in Ex parte Ainsworth, 27 Tex. 732, and it was there held that a person could not appeal from an order refusing to issue the writ of habeas corpus, but the applicant’s remedy was to apply to another court for an original writ. Por a full discussion of this question, we refer to that opinion. See, also, Ex parte Blankenship, 57 S. W. 647; Ex parte Foster, 5 Tex. App. 625, 32 Am. Rep. 577; Ex parte Strong, 34 Tex. Cr. R. 310, 30 S. W. 666.

Appeal dismissed.