Ex Parte Pharr
Cases that cite this one
63 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Eian Tilor Hurlburt v. State (Tex. App. 2016)
- Polanco v. State (Tex. App. 1996)
- Willis Martin v. State (Tex. App. 2004)
- Kenneth Dewayne Nelson v. State (Tex. App. 2019)
- Vincent Gage Santoro v. State (Tex. App. 2018)
- Buford Lloyd Crowell v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2021)
- Shain Michael Pugh v. State (Tex. App. 2018)
- Miranda Renea Kelso v. State (Tex. App. 2018)
- Webb, Michael Renard (Tex. App. 2015)
- Webb, Michael Renard (Tex. App. 2015)
- Grady Leroy Martin v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Tracy Lynn Meneley v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Tracy Lynn Meneley v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Tracy Lynn Meneley v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Thomas Johnson v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Thomas Johnson v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Ahmad Jamal Acrond A/K/A Ahmad Jamal Achrond v. State (Tex. App. 2009)
- Jones v. State (Tex. App. 2003)
- Connie Boerne Williams v. State (Tex. App. 2000)
- Ex Parte McJunkins (Tex. Crim. App. 1997)
- Ex Parte McJunkins (Tex. Crim. App. 1996)
- State v. Cannady (Tex. App. 1996)
- Christopher Allen Johnson v. the State of Texas (Tex. App. 2023)
- Martinez, Andrey Cardiel (Tex. Crim. App. 2018)
- Eric Weems Rogers v. State (Tex. App. 2017)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
OPINION
This is a post-conviction application for a writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07, V.A.C.C.P. Applicant was convicted of two capital murders. Pursuant to a plea agreement, punishment was assessed at life imprisonment in each cause, to be served consecutively. No appeal was taken.
Applicant contends that the trial court improperly cumulated the sentences in these causes because they arose out of the same criminal episode and were prosecuted in the same criminal action. See V.T.C.A., Penal Code, Section 3.03; LaPorte v. State, 840 S.W.2d 412 (Tex.Cr.App. 1992). The trial court found that applicant was not tried in a single criminal action. We agree.
The Texas Legislature intended a “single criminal action” to refer to a single trial or plea proceeding. LaPorte, 840 S.W.2d at 414. A defendant is prosecuted in a “single criminal action” when allegations and evidence of more than one offense arising out of the same criminal episode are presented in a single trial or plea proceedings. LaPorte, 840 S.W.2d at 415.
Here, the statement of facts shows that in cause number 7760 applicant pleaded guilty, was admonished, was found guilty, and was sentenced. Immediately thereafter, in cause number 7761 applicant pleaded guilty, was admonished, was found guilty, and was sentenced. The record supports the trial court’s finding that applicant was not tried in a single criminal action. The cumu-lation order did not violate Section 3.03.
The relief sought by applicant is denied.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.