Gainer v. State

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas

Decided April 7, 1982

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · decided 1982-04-07

Cited by 2 later decisions — most recently September 1998

2 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

““Since the court of appeals has issued its mandate, we think that the appellant’s remedy must lie with that court. (For example, the appellant could move that the court of appeals withdraw its mandate and extend the time to file a motion for rehearing.)””

quoted by 1 later decision, including Gonzalez v. State

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1982-04-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1ORDER

PER CURIAM.

¶2The appellant moves that this court extend the deadline for him to file a petition for review. He alleges that, although he sent copies of his petition for review to this court and to counsel for the State, he failed to file the original petition with the court of appeals as required by Tex.Cr.App.R. 304(b). He also alleges that the court of appeals has issued its mandate.

¶3Since the court of appeals has issued its mandate, we think that the appellant’s remedy must lie with that court. (For example, the appellant could move that the court of appeals withdraw its mandate and extend the time for him to file a motion for rehearing.)

¶4The motion is denied.