# Ex Parte Carmona

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · March 1, 2006 · 185 S.W.3d 492

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9668222

## Case

- **Full name:** Ex Parte Carlos CARMONA
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** March 1, 2006
- **Citations:** 185 S.W.3d 492; 2006 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 427; 2006 WL 475455
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Womack
- **Judges:** Price, Heryey, Johnson, Holcomb, Cochran, Womack, Hervey, Keller, Keasler, Meyers
- **Cited by:** 108 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/9668222

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that due process applies to parole revocations
- noting that “a collateral attack is ‘[a]n attack on a judgment entered in a different proceeding.’ ”
- noting that Aa collateral attack is >[a]n attack on a judgment entered in a different proceeding.=@

## Opinion text

WOMACK, J.,
filed a concurring opinion.
It seems to me there are three issues.
The first is, shall habeas corpus relief be granted from a judgment revoking community supervision when the judge of the convicting court has found from the testimony of recanting witnesses, and this Court agrees, that the defendant did not violate the conditions of his community supervision? I would hold that, if habeas corpus relief from a judgment of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt will be granted on the basis of recantations, as this court has held, 1 then it must follow that relief from a community-supervision revocation will be granted.
Second, is habeas corpus relief on that basis available in the particular kind of community supervision called “deferred adjudication,” despite the statutory provision, “No appeal may be taken from this determination” 2 ? For the reasons given in the opinion of the Court, ante at 496, I agree that it is.
Finally, is the relief the Court gives in this case proper? I agree that it is.
. See Ex parte Elizondo, 947 S.W.2d 202 (Tex.Cr.App.1996).
. See Code Crim. Proc. art 42.12, § 5(b).

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9668222. Public record. Not legal advice.