Court Opinion

ID: 9768466
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-29 06:04:25.100349+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:30:41.038955
License: Public Domain

ON relator’s motion for rehearing
WOODLEY, Judge.
Since our original opinion was handed down denying relator’s discharge, it appears that further testimony has been heard and the record thereof forwarded to this court.
Assuming that the judge had authority to conduct the hearings and that this court is authorized to consider the additional testimony, we remain convinced that relator is not entitled to credit for the time he was at large after the issuance of the mandate of this court affirming his five-year sentence.
The trial judge was not only without authority to grant probation after the affirmance of the conviction on appeal, but his attempt to reduce the term below the minimum provided by statute for the offense was void.
Relator applied for probation when he pleaded guilty. He will not now be heard to say that by no conduct on his part did he escape confinement during the period he was at large under the void order.
Relator’s motion for rehearing is overruled.