*1 762
OPINION parte Bobby Ex ASH. Edward DAVIS, Commissioner. No. 49298. an application This is for writ of habeas Appeals of Criminal
Court of Texas. corpus by Department an inmate in the of 23, Oct. 1974. Corrections. Petitioner was convicted for burglary the offense of in the Dis- 140th County trict of on Court Lubbock Novem- 29, petition- jury ber that 1966. The found pre- person er had was the same who been viously felony of two offenses convicted as- capital, punishment less was than and 63, Vernon’s Ann. sessed at life under Art. Court, taken this and Appeal P.C. was to State, Ash judgment the was v. affirmed. 1967). 420 (Tex.Cr.App., S.W.2d 703 Ann.C.C.P., 11.07, Under Art. Vernon’s parte Young, in with Ex and accordance 824, petitioner Tex.Cr.App., S.W.2d 418 applied corpus the writ habeas to for of indictments, court, alleging that the trial prior judgments, in the two and sentences of on for enhancement convictions relied n punishment his void be- render conviction prove to the cause introduced the evidence preclude the prior two offenses does not occurred possibility that the second offense Spe- prior alleged to the older offense. cifically, appellant the indictment points to alleges in latter which the second and case robbery by the of assault occurred offense 25, 1956, that May urges on or and about robbery for statute limitations since the of years,1 have is five the offense could (5) 1951, 25, May been committed as far back as prior a to in the indict- alleged time the date of The convic- ment for the offense theft. case, prior, was tion in the theft the older alleging that upon based an indictment 17, such about offense occurred on or June 1952. hearing, Following the trial the habeas McFall, Lubbock, R. for appellant. John findings concluded the court and entered sought relief should be denied. Griffin, Alton Atty., Dist. Zant and Woodul, Atty., Lubbock, State, Asst. Dist. Tex.Cr.App., and 442 S. In v. Wheat Vollers, Austin, D. Atty., 363, State’s to for identical where a contention W.2d Jim the State. petitioner was by the one herein advanced 12.03,
1. Art. V.A.C.C.P.
763 re appeal, this Court on direct raised State, 169 holding Rogers Appellant, in v. GRANDISON,
viewed the Paul John 383, stating: 239, in 333 Tex.Cr.R. S.W.2d v. Appellee. felony Texas, for of “Observing an indictment that The STATE years, five may presented within be theft No. 48976. 179, (Art. V.A.C.C.P. but not afterward Appeals of Criminal Texas. Court of the that 12.03), it held (cid:127) —now Art. was did not the indictment introduction of 1974. 23, Oct.
supply necessary proof.” the State, Rogers supra, and v. Wheat
While at- State, such supra, were cases where
v. petitioner appeal, made on direct
tack was by way
is the identical contention urging
of attack. collateral Taylor, Tex.Cr.App., parte 480 S.
In Ex 692, this
W.2d Court stated: in this been the rule
“It has uniform quantum evidence the of the that
State is
necessary jury’s a verdict to sustain the subject attack after to collateral
not final, conviction becomes [authorities
omitted]” of ha- application for writ
Petitioner’s merit, hereby is is without and corpus
beas
denied.
Opinion approved by the Court.
MORRISON, Judge (concurring). Daniels, Tex.Cr.App., parte 252 S.W.
Ex 586, conten presented
2d a similar which bar, the is distin
tion to that in case at Daniel, supra, In indictment
guishable. the sus its face that it would not
showed on 63,
tain a under Article V.A.P. conviction
C. is at bar valid
The in the case indictment question proof the of of
on its face. The is a sequence convictions not
proper of collaterally, be- can be raised
matter which question suf- essentially
cause it is a of the parte Taylor,
ficiency the Ex of evidence. 692; and Ex
Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d
parte Tex.Cr.App., 323 950. Lyles, S.W.2d Huff, Tex.Cr.App., parte Ex 316
See also 896.
S.W.2d Dallas, appellant. Law, for Howard B. in the denial concur of relief. I