holding that article 22.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure “mandates the entry of judgment in the full amount of the bond except where exoneration is proper under Art. 22.13 [] or remittitur is discretionary under Art. 22.16 [I. On the basis of the facts and the applicable law, the entry ofjudgment in this case was strictly ministerial in nature.“
How later courts described this case
- holding that article 22.02 of the Code of Criminal Procedure “mandates the entry of judgment in the full amount of the bond except where exoneration is proper under Art. 22.13 [] or remittitur is discretionary under Art. 22.16 [I. On the basis of the facts and the applicable law, the entry ofjudgment in this case was strictly ministerial in nature.“
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
On Motion for Rehearing.
HAWKINS, J.
No questions are called to our attention as having been overlooked in the original consideration of the case, and all points which are again stressed in appellant’s motion have been carefully re-exam *906 ined. No doubt exists in our mind as to tbe correctness of tbe disposition of tbis appeal. To write further would necessitate repetition wbicb would serve no useful purpose.
Tbe motion for rebearing is overruled.