*1 575 fоregoing opinion Appeals The of the of has Commission by Judges Appeals been examined the of the of Criminal Court apprоved by and the Court. Parte R. E.
Ex Noble. 8,
No. 22759. Delivered December 1943. Rehearing Jаnuary 26, Denied 1944. opinion
The states the case. Rotan, Davidson, аppellant. Howard of for Bеll, Spurgeon Attorney, Austin, E. State’s of for the State. DAVIDSON, Judge. appeal Judge
This is an an from order the of of the 90th Stephens County, refusing District of Court to the issue writ corpus upon of appellant’s appliсation habeas therefor. judgmеnt an
Such order is not a final of whiсh this court has jurisdiction upon aрpeal. parte Smith, 649, Ex Tex. 85 Cr. R. 299; Sheets, parte 370, Ex 215 S. W. 126 Tex. R. Cr. 64 S. W. 781; (2d) parte Steele, 539, Ex 135 (2d) Tex. R. Cr. 121 S. W. 605; Jurisprudence 21 Texas 483. appeal
The is dismissed. therefоre foregoing opinion of Appeals The the of Commission has by Judges Appeals examined the of the of been and Court Criminal by аpproved the Court.
576 FOR REHEARING.
ON MOTION Presiding HAWKINS, Judge. *2 dismissing the
Appеllant in that we were in error insists aрpeal. appeal from support proposition thаt no will lie of the In refusing the corpus of we issue a writ habeas cite an order to orig- following to in our the authorities referred in additiоn to 243, opinion: in Branch’s Ann. Tex. cases listed Section inal See Thоmas, 152, parte R. C., p. particularly Ex 61 Tex. Cr. and
P. 845; 136, Barnett, also 573; R. 167 W. parte Ex 74 Tex. Cr. S. p. 483, 57. 21. Tex. Jur. sec. rehearing for he adverts to the Smith
In relator’s motion supporting original opinion our as not to in our case rеferred two quite arises from the fаct that are sure this conclusion. We W., page in- reported of 215 each are on 299 S. Smith casеs volving upon by proceedings. corpus The one relied us habeas parte parte Mary Smith. Ex and not Ex Sam was Smith rehearing motion for is overruled. Relator’s v. The Johnnie Orr State. January 26, 22700. Delivered 1944.
No.