Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

582 S.W.2d 156

Cross v. Metcalfe

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1979-06-13

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently June 2006

1 state decisions

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1979-06-13

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

DALLY, Judge.

¶2This is an original proceeding in which the petitioner asks this Court to issue a writ of mandamus ordering the Hon. Don Met-calfe, Judge of Criminal District Court No. 2 of Dallas County to hear the petitioner’s motion for shock probation under Art. 42.-12, Sec. 3d, V.A.C.C.P.

¶3The petitioner’s motion for leave to file his petition for writ of mandamus was improvidently granted, and the motion is hereby dismissed.

¶4It is so ordered.

CLINTON, Judge,

¶5dissenting to order dismissing.

¶6In accordance with the established rule, four judges voted to grant leave to file petition for writ of mandamus and the cause was submitted on oral argument to the Court en banc. Now without addressing the substantial issues presented, the majority says leave to file was “improvidently granted.” To this destruction of the “rule of four,” I emphatically dissent.

/582/sw2d/156 · .json · Public domain