Ex Parte: Adam Porras ( 2022 )

COURT OF APPEALS
EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
EL PASO, TEXAS
§ No. 08-22-00115-CR
§ Appeal from the
EX PARTE: ADAM PORRAS § 106th Judicial District Court
§ of Gaines County, Texas
§ (TC# 22-5803)
MEMORANDUM OPINION
This is an appeal of the trial court’s order denying Appellant’s pretrial application for writ
of habeas corpus seeking a bond reduction. We dismiss this appeal as moot. 1
Appellant failed to timely file an Appellant’s Brief or a motion for extension of time to file
same. Accordingly, on August 31, 2022, we issued a letter to Appellant directing him to file an
extension motion and his brief within ten days. When Appellant failed to do so, we abated this
appeal and remanded the case to the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine whether Appellant
wished to pursue the appeal and whether he had been deprived of effective assistance of counsel.
The trial court conducted the hearing and entered findings, concluding that, following a bargained-
1
This case was transferred from our sister court in Eastland (11th District) pursuant to the Texas Supreme Court’s
docket equalization efforts. See TEX.GOV’T CODE ANN. section 73.001. We follow the precedent of the Eastland Court
of Appeals to the extent they might conflict with our own. See TEX.R.APP.P. 41.3.
for guilty plea—wherein Appellant pleaded guilty to lesser-included offenses of two of the charged
counts in exchange for dismissal of all remaining counts—Appellant no longer desired to pursue
this appeal. The trial court also found Appellant had not been deprived of effective assistance of
counsel.
Where appellant has been convicted of the underlying offenses, or the offenses have been
dismissed, his appeal from the pretrial habeas application for a reduction of bond becomes moot.
See Saucedo v. State, 795 S.W.2d 8, 9 (Tex.App—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, no pet.)(finding
issues regarding appellant’s pretrial restraint rendered moot by entry of his guilty plea to the
underlying criminal offense because he is now confined based on judgment and sentence, not on
the complained-of process underlying his original detention); State v. Golding, 398 S.W.3d 745,
747 (Tex.App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref’d)(legal issues raised in habeas application are
rendered moot where the premise of habeas application is “destroyed by subsequent
developments”); Duggan v. State,No. 01-90-00379-CR, 1991 WL 67006, at *1 (Tex.App.—
Houston [1st Dist.] May 2, 1991, no pet.)(per curiam)(not designated for publication)(dismissing
as moot pretrial habeas writ seeking bond reduction where appellant pleaded guilty to the
underlying offenses).
We adopt the trial court’s findings and dismiss this appeal as moot.
YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Chief Justice
October 26, 2022
Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
2