Bushnell Vs. Ellis

Bushnell vs Ellis

Type Court Judgment Court US Supreme Court Decided May-22-1961

~2 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/100097

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/100097
Court: US Supreme Court
Decided On: May-22-1961
Case Number: 366 U.S. 418
Subject: Education

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

Education

Key legal issue: Education

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Bushnell

Respondent

Ellis

Excerpt

.....wilson, attorney general, and linward shivers, assistant attorney general. per curiam. the judgment of the court of criminal appeals of texas is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to grant petitioner a hearing upon his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. uveges v. pennsylvania, 335 u.s. 437 ; cash v. culver, 358 u.s. 633 ; mcneal v. culver, 365 u.s. 109 . mr. justice stewart took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. mr. justice clark, with whom mr. justice frankfurter and mr. justice harlan join, dissenting. this application for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus was filed as an original action in the court of criminal appeals of texas. neither the record, the briefs, nor argument of counsel indicates that such an action has ever been filed in a district court of texas as appears to be required by texas procedure. see ex parte rodriguez, page 366 u.s. 418, 419 169 tex. cr. r. ___, 334 s. w. 2d 294 (1960); ex parte fitzpatrick, 167 tex. cr. r. 376, 320 s. w. 2d 683 (1959); ex parte brooks, 85 tex. cr. r. 397, 212 s. w. 956 (1919). the judgment of the court of criminal appeals might, therefore, have been based upon an independent state ground. in this condition of the record, i would affirm the judgment without prejudice to the petitioner's filing in any appropriate texas district court an application for a writ of habeas corpus to test out the validity of his detention. see vernon's tex. code crim. proc., art. 119.

Full Judgment

BUSHNELL v. ELLIS - 366 U.S. 418 (1961)
U.S. Supreme Court BUSHNELL v. ELLIS, 366 U.S. 418 (1961) 366 U.S. 418

BUSHNELL v. ELLIS, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR.
CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS.
No. 561.
Argued May 2, 1961.
Decided May 22, 1961.

Judgment reversed and cause remanded to Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas to grant petitioner a hearing on his petition for writ of habeas corpus.

Percy D. Williams, acting under appointment by the Court, 364 U.S. 917, argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioner.

B. H. Timmins, Jr., Assistant Attorney General of Texas, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Will Wilson, Attorney General, and Linward Shivers, Assistant Attorney General.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas is reversed and the cause is remanded to that court with directions to grant petitioner a hearing upon his petition for a writ of habeas corpus. Uveges v. Pennsylvania, 335 U.S. 437 ; Cash v. Culver, 358 U.S. 633 ; McNeal v. Culver, 365 U.S. 109 .

MR. JUSTICE STEWART took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

MR. JUSTICE CLARK, with whom MR. JUSTICE FRANKFURTER and MR. JUSTICE HARLAN join, dissenting.

This application for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus was filed as an original action in the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas. Neither the record, the briefs, nor argument of counsel indicates that such an action has ever been filed in a District Court of Texas as appears to be required by Texas procedure. See Ex parte Rodriguez,

Page 366 U.S. 418, 419

169 Tex. Cr. R. ___, 334 S. W. 2d 294 (1960); Ex parte Fitzpatrick, 167 Tex. Cr. R. 376, 320 S. W. 2d 683 (1959); Ex parte Brooks, 85 Tex. Cr. R. 397, 212 S. W. 956 (1919). The judgment of the Court of Criminal Appeals might, therefore, have been based upon an independent state ground. In this condition of the record, I would affirm the judgment without prejudice to the petitioner's filing in any appropriate Texas District Court an application for a writ of habeas corpus to test out the validity of his detention. See Vernon's Tex. Code Crim. Proc., Art. 119.

Same Parties Bushnell vs Ellis Same Subject Education

Education court of criminal appeals writ of habeas corpus Without prejudice attorney general district court habeas corpus