X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Click here for the full text of this decision FACTS:Morris S. Jones was convicted of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. After his conviction was affirmed on appeal, Jones filed an application for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus claiming, in part, that newly discovered evidence established that he was actually innocent of the offense of which he was convicted. After a hearing, the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals vacated Jones’ conviction and remanded Jones to Dallas County to answer the charging indictment, and the trial court dismissed the charges. Jones applied for compensation for wrongful imprisonment through the comptroller, and his request was denied. Then, he sued the State of Texas and Carole Keeton Strayhorn, comptroller of public accounts, (collectively the state) for compensation for wrongful imprisonment. The trial court dismissed Jones’ suit for want of jurisdiction, concluding that �103.002 of the Texas Civil Practice & Remedies Code statutorily prohibited Jones from attempting to obtain compensation by filing suit because he had already proceeded in and sought compensation through the administrative process. HOLDING:Affirmed. Jones argues that, although �103.002 prohibits double recovery, he may proceed as he did without being barred. He contends that �103.002, governing compensation to persons wrongfully imprisoned, does not preclude a person from seeking recovery both administratively and by filing suit. Rather, according to Jones, only double recovery is prohibited. The court analyzes the wording of �103.002 and the plain meaning of the statutory language leads the court to conclude that �103.002 grants a party the discretion “to begin and carry on” a claim for compensation either administratively or by filing suit, but that party may not “ask for, demand, or request” compensation both administratively and by filing suit. The court therefore determines that the trial court did not err when it dismissed for want of jurisdiction Jones’s claim for compensation because Jones had previously sought compensation administratively through the comptroller. OPINION:Lang, J.; Thomas, C.J., Whittington and Lang, JJ.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.