because allegations raised by petition for Expunction of Arrests revealed that petitioner was neither confined nor restrained pursuant to any state action which was subject of his petition, and because disposition of petitioner’s claim would not affect fact or duration of his confinement, such petition could not be construed as petition for writ of habeas corpus which would invoke jurisdiction of Court of Criminal Appeals
How later courts described this case
- because allegations raised by petition for Expunction of Arrests revealed that petitioner was neither confined nor restrained pursuant to any state action which was subject of his petition, and because disposition of petitioner’s claim would not affect fact or duration of his confinement, such petition could not be construed as petition for writ of habeas corpus which would invoke jurisdiction of Court of Criminal Appeals
- because no collateral legal consequences attend prior arrest records of petitioner, habeas corpus held to be an inappropriate method to seek expungement of those records
- no constitutional or statutory authority authorizing an appeal from an order on a motion for expunction of arrest records
- "[i]t is well settled in this State that the right to appeal generally is a statutory right"
Written by the judges who cited it.
Later courts went against this
Overruled on other grounds by Weiner v. Dial, 1983 Tex. Crim. App. LEXIS 1102 (1983)
573 S.W.2d 525 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978), overruled on other grounds, Weiner v. State, 653 S.W.2d 786
The opinion
ODOM, Judge,
dissenting.
I dissent to the majority’s decision to overrule petitioner’s motion for leave to file motion for rehearing without written opinion. The case presents a serious question of constitutional magnitude regarding criminal law matters in this State, and the recently expanded mandamus jurisdiction of this Court should be exercised to resolve the matter. Art. 5, Sec. 5, Texas Constitution. I dissent for the reasons more fully set forth in my opinion in State v. Henson, 573 S.W.2d 548 (No. 60,141, this day decided, Roberts, J.).
ONION, P. J., joins this dissent.