EX PARTE LARRY ALAN NEVIL (other)

Annotate this Case
Texas Judiciary Online - HTML Opinion     Close This Window

span.WPParaBox { padding: 0px; width: 100%; margin: 0px; display: block } div.WPParaBoxWrapper { padding: 0px; float: left } p { margin-top: 0px; margin-bottom: 1px } hr { height: 0.0125in; background-color: black } body { font-family: "Times New Roman", serif; font-size: 12pt; font-weight: normal; font-style: normal }








IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS



NO. AP-76,015




EX PARTE LARRY ALAN NEVIL, Applicant




ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 0948446D IN THE 371st DISTRICT COURT

FROM TARRANT COUNTY




           Per curiam.


O P I N I O N


            Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant pleaded guilty and was convicted of assault-family violence, enhanced by a prior family violence conviction, and sentenced to three years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.

            Applicant contends that his conviction violates prohibitions against ex post facto laws. The State agrees.

            The trial court agrees in its findings of fact and conclusions of law filed pursuant to this application, that the conviction violates prohibitions against ex post facto laws. Applicant is entitled to relief. Scott v. State, 55 S.W.3d 593 (Tex. Crim. App. 2001).

            Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 0948446D in the 371st Judicial District Court of Tarrant County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the sheriff of Tarrant County to answer the charges as set out in the indictment.

            Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

 

Delivered: October 8, 2008

Do Not Publish

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.