Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 15: Difference between revisions

Jump to navigation Jump to search

Texas Constitution:Article V, Section 15 (view source)

Revision as of 11:28, August 22, 2023

5 bytes removed ,  August 22, 2023
m
no edit summary
imported>Admin
No edit summary
 
mNo edit summary
 
Line 29: Line 29:
* ''Ex parte Craig'', 193 S.W.2d 178, [https://cite.case.law/pdf/10187904/Ex%20parte%20Craig,%20193%20S.W.2d%20178%20(1946).pdf#page=8 185] (Tex.Crim.App. 1946) ("It becomes material to know the meaning of 'due administration of justice', as applied to the instant case. The County Court of Nueces County is a court of record, made so by Art. 5, sec. 15, Texas Constitution. This section also prescribes the legal qualifications of the judge as one 'well informed in the law of the State.' The Legislature not having attempted by statute to make more specific the meaning of that phrase, it follows that a county judge is not required to be one licensed to practice law in this State. So, under our Constitution, the people, in electing one to the office of county judge, determine his right to hold that high office.")
* ''Ex parte Craig'', 193 S.W.2d 178, [https://cite.case.law/pdf/10187904/Ex%20parte%20Craig,%20193%20S.W.2d%20178%20(1946).pdf#page=8 185] (Tex.Crim.App. 1946) ("It becomes material to know the meaning of 'due administration of justice', as applied to the instant case. The County Court of Nueces County is a court of record, made so by Art. 5, sec. 15, Texas Constitution. This section also prescribes the legal qualifications of the judge as one 'well informed in the law of the State.' The Legislature not having attempted by statute to make more specific the meaning of that phrase, it follows that a county judge is not required to be one licensed to practice law in this State. So, under our Constitution, the people, in electing one to the office of county judge, determine his right to hold that high office.")


* ''Clark v. Finley'', 54 S.W. 343, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/Vol_054_SWR_343.pdf#page=5 347] (Tex. 1899) ("But it is also contended that the act is invalid because, by the provision under consideration, the legislature attempts to confer upon a judicial officer a power which is not judicial. To this it is sufficient to answer that the county judge is not a judicial officer only. When holding sessions of his court, his powers are, as a rule, purely judicial; but, in addition to his duties as a judge, there are various executive and ministerial functions conferred upon him by the constitution and laws. Besides this, we have held that a court may, if it will, exercise an extrajudicial power conferred upon it by the legislature, such as the removal of the disabilities of a minor.")
* ''Clark v. Finley'', 54 S.W. 343, [https://texaslegalguide.com/images/054_SW_343.pdf#page=5 347] (Tex. 1899) ("But it is also contended that the act is invalid because, by the provision under consideration, the legislature attempts to confer upon a judicial officer a power which is not judicial. To this it is sufficient to answer that the county judge is not a judicial officer only. When holding sessions of his court, his powers are, as a rule, purely judicial; but, in addition to his duties as a judge, there are various executive and ministerial functions conferred upon him by the constitution and laws. Besides this, we have held that a court may, if it will, exercise an extrajudicial power conferred upon it by the legislature, such as the removal of the disabilities of a minor.")


* ''Little v. State'', 12 S.W. 965, [https://cite.case.law/pdf/2185010/Little%20v.%20State%20ex%20rel.%20Parsell,%2075%20Tex.%20616%20(1890).pdf#page=5 967] (Tex. 1890) ("It is apparent that county judges were not required to be lawyers, because that qualification is expressly provided by the constitution for judges of the higher courts. In this state, more than half the county judges who have been elected since the constitution was adopted have been persons who have never devoted a day to the study of the law; and probably there have been more lawyers elected to the position than was expected when the constitution was framed. Was it contemplated that these lay judges should be held disqualified because they could not swear that they were well informed in the law, or could not define a mandamus or an injunction?")
* ''Little v. State'', 12 S.W. 965, [https://cite.case.law/pdf/2185010/Little%20v.%20State%20ex%20rel.%20Parsell,%2075%20Tex.%20616%20(1890).pdf#page=5 967] (Tex. 1890) ("It is apparent that county judges were not required to be lawyers, because that qualification is expressly provided by the constitution for judges of the higher courts. In this state, more than half the county judges who have been elected since the constitution was adopted have been persons who have never devoted a day to the study of the law; and probably there have been more lawyers elected to the position than was expected when the constitution was framed. Was it contemplated that these lay judges should be held disqualified because they could not swear that they were well informed in the law, or could not define a mandamus or an injunction?")
Retrieved from "https://texaslegalguide.com/Special:MobileDiff/6534"

Navigation menu