Ex Parte Jonathan Ingram v. the State of Texas ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • Opinion issued June 27, 2023
    In The
    Court of Appeals
    For The
    First District of Texas
    ————————————
    NO. 01-23-00117-CR
    NO. 01-23-00118-CR
    ———————————
    EX PARTE JONATHAN INGRAM, Appellant
    On Appeal from the 183rd District Court
    Harris County, Texas
    Trial Court Case No. 1784181 & 1803439
    MEMORANDUM OPINION
    In each trial court cause, appellant Johnathan Ingram filed pretrial applications
    for writ of habeas corpus, arguing that the statute under which he was charged was
    facially unconstitutional. The trial court denied the applications on January 19,
    2023. Appellant filed notices of appeal on February 3, 2023.
    On March 3, 2023, appellant’s counsel filed motions to dismiss, contending
    that appellant had pleaded guilty and no longer wished to prosecute the appeals. The
    motions failed to comply with Rule 42.2(a) in that they did not include appellant’s
    signature. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). Because these motions did not comply with
    Rule 42.2(a), the Court denied the motions.
    The clerk’s records and supplemental clerk’s records indicate that appellant
    pleaded guilty in return for the State’s recommendation that punishment be set at
    two years’ deferred adjudication community supervision. On February 8, 2023, the
    trial court entered orders of deferred adjudication based on the plea bargain and
    placing appellant on deferred adjudication community supervision for two years.
    On May 25, 2023, the Court issued a notice that the appeals might be
    dismissed as moot given that appellant had pleaded guilty and was no longer
    confined on the charges for which he had sought habeas relief. See Ex parte Sewell,
    
    495 S.W.3d 54
    , 55 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2016, no pet.) (observing that
    appeal from denial of application for writ of habeas corpus is moot once appellant is
    no longer confined on charge). Appellant filed no response to the notice.
    Accordingly, we dismiss these appeals as moot. Any pending motions are
    dismissed as moot.
    PER CURIAM
    Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Countiss.
    Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
    2
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 01-23-00118-CR

Filed Date: 6/27/2023

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 7/3/2023