Case Name: Johnny B. STEVENSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee
Court: Texas Court of Criminal Appeals
Jurisdiction: Texas
Decision Date: 1988-05-25
Citations: 751 S.W.2d 508
Docket Number: No. 928-85
Parties: Johnny B. STEVENSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
Judges: TEAGUE and CAMPBELL, JJ., join this opinion.
Reporter: South Western Reporter Second Series
Volume: 751
Pages: 508–512

Head Matter:
Johnny B. STEVENSON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.
No. 928-85
Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, En Banc.
May 25, 1988.
Gerald L. Brantley, Abilene, for appellant.
Jorge A. Solis, Former Dist. Atty. & Paul Campolo, Asst. Dist. Atty., Abilene, Robert Huttash, State’s Atty. & Alfred Walker, First Asst. State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

Opinion:
OPINION ON STATE'S PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW
ONION, Presiding Judge.
Appellant was convicted of forgery and punishment was assessed at ten years imprisonment. The Eastland Court of Appeals ruled that the trial court had improperly denied appellant's speedy trial motion, reversed the conviction, and ordered the prosecution dismissed. The State petitioned this Court for discretionary review, which we granted to consider the constitutionality of Art. 32A.02, V.A.C.C.P., hereinafter the Speedy Trial Act.
A majority of this Court recently declared the Speedy Trial Act unconstitutional and void in its entirety. Meshell v. State, 739 S.W.2d 246 (Tex.Cr.App.1987). The holding in Meshell, supra, announced that by enacting the Speedy Trial Act the Legislature had violated the separation of powers doctrine under Article II, § 1 of the Texas Constitution. Meshell's motion for leave to file a motion for rehearing was denied November 4, 1987. We recently held that an unconstitutional statute is void from its inception and cannot provide a basis for any right or relief. Jefferson v. State, 751 S.W.2d 502 (Tex.Cr.App.1988). See also 12 Tex.Jur.3d, Constitutional Law, § 41, at 548 (and cases in n. 33 thereof).
We therefore find that based upon the decision in Meshell, supra, the Court of Appeals improperly sustained appellant's Speedy Trial Act claims on appeal. We reverse the Court of Appeals' disposition of the claims and remand the case to that court for consideration of appellant's other points of error.