Ex Parte Jose Manuel Maldonado

Summary

The Court dismissed the applicant’s habeas corpus petition because it failed to allege specific facts showing that the erroneous jury charge denied a fair and impartial trial. The Court emphasized that post‑conviction collateral attacks require detailed factual allegations, not mere conclusions of law. The dismissal is without prejudice, allowing the applicant to replead with adequate facts. Justice Teague dissented, arguing that the charge error warrants relief and criticizing the majority’s pleading test.