Martinez, Lupe Iii ( 2016 )


Menu:
  •              IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
    OF TEXAS
    NO. WR-84,442-01
    EX PARTE LUPE MARTINEZ III, Applicant
    ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
    CAUSE NO. 13-11-00225CRF-A IN THE 81ST DISTRICT COURT
    FROM FRIO COUNTY
    Per curiam.
    ORDER
    Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the
    clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte
    Young, 
    418 S.W.2d 824
    , 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). On October 23, 2014, Applicant pleaded no
    contest to possession of a controlled substance with the intent to deliver and was sentenced to seven
    years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction.
    After Applicant was convicted, trial counsel prepared a two-page handwritten application for
    a writ of habeas corpus. On November 12, 2015, the trial judge signed this application and wrote
    the following: “The writ is granted. The October 23, 2014 judgment is set aside and the parties
    returned to the position they were in prior to the plea.” The State agreed to this and also signed the
    2
    application. On November 12, 2015, the trial judge also signed an order dismissing the charges in
    this cause. The Frio County District Clerk forwarded the handwritten application to this Court and
    later forwarded a supplemental application filed on the prescribed form for Article 11.07
    applications. As we understand the record, Applicant filed this supplemental application because
    his initial one failed to comply with the Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX . R. APP. P. 73.1(a)
    (“Prescribed Form. An application filed under Article 11.07 must be on the form prescribed by the
    Court of Criminal Appeals”).
    We now dismiss this application for noncompliance. Applicant’s third and fourth grounds
    in his supplemental application are not stated on the prescribed form. “Rule 73.1 requires an
    applicant to state the grounds for relief and the supporting facts on the prescribed form.” Ex parte
    Blacklock, 
    191 S.W.3d 718
    , 719 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006); see also TEX . R. APP . P. 73.1(c).
    If Applicant intended to file his initial handwritten application under Article 11.07, as we
    understand the record, we remind the trial judge that only this Court has the authority to grant relief
    on an application for a writ of habeas corpus under Article 11.07. See Ex parte Ybarra, 
    629 S.W.2d 943
    , 946–47 (Tex. Crim. App. 1982) (Under Article 11.07 “[o]nly the Court of Criminal Appeals
    has the authority to grant relief as a result of post conviction writ of habeas corpus”). We also note
    that after final conviction in a felony case, other than one in which the death penalty is imposed,
    Article 11.07 is the exclusive procedure and “any other proceeding shall be void and of no force and
    effect in discharging the prisoner.” TEX . CODE CRIM . PROC. art. 11.07, § 5. Therefore, the trial
    judge’s order dismissing the charges in this cause was of no force in discharging Applicant.
    This application is dismissed.
    3
    Filed: February 10, 2016
    Do not publish
    

Document Info

Docket Number: WR-84,442-01

Filed Date: 2/10/2016

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 2/11/2016