Court Opinion

ID: 9763849
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 02:58:06.304795+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:29:50.232323
License: Public Domain

*822MORRISON, Judge
(dissenting).
In Swilley v. McCain, supra, an opinion by the Supreme Court of this State in a civil case, which the majority cites on the question of stare decisis, the Court stated:
“It is necessary at this point to notice two differences between the doctrine of res judicata and the rule of stare decisis. After a question of law or an issue of fact has been litigated and adjudicated in a court of competent jurisdiction, the same matter cannot be relitigated in a subsequent suit between the same parties or those in privity with them. This is by virtue of the doctrine of res judicata, which thus extends to both questions of law and issues of fact but binds only the parties to the first suit and those who claim under them.” [Emphasis Supplied]
The parties in both Cause #11,620 and Cause #11,622 were the State of Texas and this appellant, Charles Albert Young. Both cases were tried, upon a plea of guilty to burglary, in the same court on the same date and before the same judge. I contend that when this Court held, in Ex parte Young, 417 S.W.2d 403, that appellant was not represented by counsel in Cause #11,-620, we adjudicated the same question of fact now before this Court; that is, we concluded that appellant, Charles Albert Young, was not represented by counsel when he appeared in the District Court of Kaufman County on September 20, 1954, and it cannot be litigated again.
Further, it is unreasonable to believe appellant was represented by counsel in one of these causes and not in another “back-to-back” case. My conclusions do not “assume” the appellant’s lack of representation as the majority suggests, but rather, represent a logical extension and reasonable interpretation of this Court’s earlier holding in Ex parte Young, supra.
I respectfully dissent to that portion of the majority opinion which fails to' reform the judgment and sentence to reflect the invalidity of Cause #11,622.