Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

417 S.W.2d 279

Ex Parte Zerschausky

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1967-06-07

Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently July 1978

2 federal appellate · 7 state decisions

Relies on Washington v. Texas

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1967-06-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ON REHEARING

BELCHER, Judge.

¶2The majority opinion delivered June 7, 1967, denying the relief prayed for was not bottomed upon the constitutionality of the Texas Statutes (Art. 711, Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P. since repealed and Art. 82, Vernon’s Ann.P.C., repealed by Act of the Legislature not yet in effect), but upon the holding that such statutes must yield to the constitutional right of the defendant in a given case to compulsory process for witnesses, including the right to put them on the witness stand; and to the further holding of the majority that the trial court was not called upon to make any ruling and made none which denied petitioner’s constitutional rights to compulsory process for witnesses or to put them on the witness stand.

¶3The decision of the Supreme Court in Washington v. State, 87 S.Ct. 1920, delivered shortly after the original opinion herein, is not inconsistent with the holding of the majority in that the trial judge did nothing to deny petitioner the right “to put his witnesses on the stand,” or the “right to compel their attendance in court.”

¶4The essence of petitioner’s position is that he was denied a fair trial because the district attorney, being called as a witness by him, declined to agree that he would not object if a witness under indictment as *285his accessory was put on the stand. We do not agree.

¶5Petitioner’s motion for rehearing is overruled.

/417/sw2d/279 · .json · Public domain