# Ex Parte Geiken

> Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas · October 4, 2000 · 28 S.W.3d 553

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9678060

## Case

- **Full name:** Ex Parte David Lee GEIKEN, Applicant
- **Court:** Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas
- **Decided:** October 4, 2000
- **Citations:** 28 S.W.3d 553; 2000 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 90; 2000 WL 1468654
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Womack
- **Judges:** Keller, Meyers, Mansfield, Price, Holland, Johnson, Keasler, McCormick, Womack
- **Cited by:** 97 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/9678060

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the judicial process is not always available to ensure error-free decision making by the executive, at least with respect to non- constitutional “rights”
- holding that an inmate is entitled to the opportunity to be heard but is not entitled to a live hearing before the making of a release decision by the Parole Board
- holding that inmate is entitled to opportunity to be heard before Board makes decision of whether to release inmate under mandatory supervision
- noting that "[t]he option of providing the Board with information supportive of release is of little practical use if the inmate is unaware that such a review will be taking place"

## Opinion text

WOMACK, Justice,
dissenting.
In my view, a convicted person who seeks relief from an error in an administrative decision of the Department of Criminal Justice may not use the procedure in article 11.07 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which “establishes the procedures for an application for a writ of habeas corpus in which the applicant seeks relief from a felony judgment imposing a penalty other than death.” * See Ex parte Whiteside, 12 S.W.3d 819, 822 (Tex.Cr.App.2000) (Womack, J., concurring). Because this application does not seek relief from a judgment, I would dismiss it without prejudice to the applicant’s seeking relief through a proper procedure. I respectfully dissent.
Tex.Code Crim. Proc. art. 11.07, § 1.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9678060. Public record. Not legal advice.