Case Name: Ex parte CATES
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1921-05-18
Citations: 231 S.W. 396
Docket Number: No. 6334
Parties: Ex parte CATES.
Judges: 
Reporter: South Western Reporter
Volume: 231
Pages: 396–397

Head Matter:
Ex parte CATES.
(No. 6334.)
(Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.
May 18, 1921.
Rehearing Granted June 9, 1921.)
1. Habeas corpus <§=»II3(9)' — Court without jurisdiction where no notice of appeal in transcript.
Where the transcript in a habeas corpus proceeding showed the application for the writ, the answer of the officers and the order denying bail, but no notice of appeal, the court had no jurisdiction.
On Motion for Rehearing.
2. Habeas corpus <⅜=»107 — Where jury fixed punishment of applicant at less than capital, court erred in denying bail.
Where the verdict of the jury upon the former trial fixed the applicant’s punishment at less than capital and testimony tending to show a conspiracy between the applicant and deceased’s wife to kill deceased was erroneously admitted, the court cannot say that the jury upon another trial would be likely to inflict the death penalty, and the applicant should be admitted to bail. ’
Appeal from District Court, Crosby County; W. R. Spencer, Judge.
Application for writ of habeas corpus by Sam Cates against the State. From an order remanding relator to the Sheriff without bail, relator appeals.
Reversed, and relator admitted to bail.
See, also, 227 S. W. 953.
Lloyd A. Wicks, of Ralls, and W. H. Bled-soe, of Lubbock, for appellant.
R. H. Hamilton, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State.

Opinion:
HAWKINS, J.
The relator filed an application for a writ of habeas corpus before 1-Ion. Judge W. R. Spencer, judge of the Seventy-Second judicial district of Texas on March 10, 1921. On April 28, upon a hearing under such application, relator was remanded to the custody of the sheriff without bond.
The record is before us in such a condition that we are unable to consider it. The transcript shows only the application for the writ, the answer of the officers, and the order denying hail. It nowhere shows notice of appeal, and there is nothing in the record advising this court in any way that the order of the district judge remanding applicant without bail was unsatisfactory to him. This is not an original writ of habeas corpus presented to this court, and if it can be entertained it must be upon appeal from a hearing before the district judge, and in the absence of notice of appeal this court has no jurisdiction.
The appeal is therefore ordered dismissed. Ex parte C. P. Shearman et al., 230 S. W. 691, decided May 11, 1921.
«SusoFor other cases see same topic and KEY-NUMBER in all Key-Numbered Digests and Indexes