# Ex Parte Kinsley

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · October 20, 1948 · 152 Tex. Crim. 425

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3908670

## Case

- **Full name:** Ex Parte James v. Kinsley.
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** October 20, 1948
- **Citations:** 152 Tex. Crim. 425; 214 S.W.2d 628; 1948 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1340
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Addendum by Graves
- **Judges:** Krueger, Graves
- **Cited by:** 2 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3908670

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an oral motion by the State setting out the reasons for dismissal is sufficient to comply with the statute

## Opinion text

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING.
GRAVES, Judge.
Relator alleges that we were in error in failing to sustain his proposition that Article 577, C. C. P., requires that the dismissal of any case or the waiver of the graver portion of the charge can only be had by a written statement from the State’s Attorney setting out his reasons therefor which shall also have the consent of the judge. This statute relative to the attorney setting out his reasons for such dismissal in writing has been held to be merely directory and not mandatory. See Wallace v. State, 145 Tex. Cr. R. 625 , 170 S. W. (2d) 762 . A substantial compliance with this statute is sufficient. See Ex Parte Rusk, 128 Tex. Cr. R. 135 , 79 S. W. (2d) 865 .
We think this cause was properly disposed of in the original opinion and the motion is therefore overruled.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/3908670. Public record. Not legal advice.