Court Opinion

ID: 9668680
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 02:21:54.422903+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:15:47.160096
License: Public Domain

MORRISON, Judge
(dissenting).
Under the opinion of the Supreme Court of this State in Dendy v. Wilson, 179 S.W. 2d 269, it is the settled law that the passage of the present Juvenile Delinquency Act in nowise deprives a minor of all the constitutional rights held by an adult. This being true, it naturally follows that this accused is entitled to have the courts protect his constitutional right not to be tried twice for the same offense. He was tried once for assault with intent to rob, which he committed at the age of thirteen, and served that term of confinement. It is established law in this state that under our Constitution robbery and the murder arising out of such robbery are the same offense. Opinion on rehearing in Doggett v. State, 130 Tex. Cr. Rep. 208, 93 S.W. 2d 399, and cases there cited. He should not now be tried again because of the protection afforded him by the Constitutions of this State and of the United States. U. S. v. Dickerson, 271 F. 2d 437, and In re Poff, 135 F. Supp. 224, support the views I here express.
To uphold this conviction would authorize the confinement of a juvenile for the maximum term prescribed by law for the offense committed and then a retrial after he attains the age of seventeen, and a subsequent reconfinement for another maximum term. Such a situation would surely be a deprivation of due process because it would be discriminating against the minor because of his age.
I respectfully dissent to the affirmance of this conviction.