Ex Parte John Davis Campbell ( 2016 )

Opinion issued June 23, 2016
In The
Court of Appeals
For The
First District of Texas
————————————
NO. 01-15-00883-CR
NO. 01-15-00884-CR
———————————
EX PARTE JOHN DAVIS CAMPBELL, Appellant
On Appeal from the 10th District Court
Galveston County, Texas
Trial Court Case Nos. 15-CR-0665 & 15-CR-0666
MEMORANDUM OPINION
John Davis Campbell appeals from the trial court’s order denying a pre-trial
application for writ of habeas corpus due to delay. Because Campbell has been
convicted in both cases, his appeals are moot. We therefore dismiss the appeals.
Background
Campbell was arrested and charged with one count of driving while
intoxicated, third or greater offense (trial court cause number 15-CR-0665),1 and
one count of possession of methamphetamine in an amount greater than one ounce
and less than four ounces (trial court cause number 15-CR-0666).2 The State was
not ready for trial within ninety days of the commencement of Campbell’s
detention, as required by Article 17.151 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.
See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 17.151, § 1(1) (West Supp. 2015).
Campbell therefore applied for a writ of habeas corpus in each case, seeking his
release because of delay. See id. The trial court denied the application for habeas
corpus, and Campbell timely appealed. See Pharris v. State, 196 S.W.3d 369, 372
n.4 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (criminal defendant may bring
interlocutory appeal of denial of writ of habeas corpus). A jury subsequently
found Campbell guilty of both charges, and the trial court entered judgments of
conviction.
1
See TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. §§ 49.04 (defining offense of driving while
intoxicated), 49.09(b)(2) (enhancing classification of offense to felony of third
degree if defendant “has previously been convicted . . . two times of any offense
relating to the operating of a motor vehicle while intoxicated) (West 2015).
2
See TEX. HEALTH & SAFETY CODE ANN. §§ 481.102(6) (listing methamphetamine
as Penalty Group 1 controlled substance), 481.115(c) (possession of more than one
gram but less than four grams of controlled substance in Penalty Group 1
constitutes felony of third degree) (West 2010).
2
Mootness
When a defendant appeals from the denial of a pre-trial application for writ
of habeas corpus under Article 17.151 and is subsequently convicted, the appeal is
moot. Martinez v. State, 826 S.W.2d 620, 620 (Tex. Crim. App. 1992); Danziger
v. State, 786 S.W.2d 723, 724 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990); see also Ex parte Morgan,
335 S.W.2d 766, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960) (appeal from denial of pre-trial bail
mooted by subsequent conviction). Because Campbell was convicted on both
charges at issue in these appeals and is no longer subject to pre-trial confinement,
the appeals are moot.
Conclusion
We dismiss the appeals as moot.
Russell Lloyd
Justice
Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Jennings and Lloyd.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
3