Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-13-00731-CR

Bryan Keith CRUM,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 198th Judicial District Court, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. B10826

Honorable M. Rex Emerson, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 27, 2013

DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION

On October 11, 2013, appellant filed a notice of appeal in this court in which he asserts the 

Kerr County District Clerk is fraudulently withholding certain documents he requested related to 

his March 19, 2012 plea bargain and conviction for murder. In his notice of appeal, appellant asks 

this court to order the district clerk “to produce said documents in order for his collateral attack to 

be successful . . . .” We assume appellant intends to collaterally attack the March 19, 2012 

conviction via a post-conviction habeas application. On November 6, 2013, we ordered appellant 

to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. Appellant 
04-13-00731-CR

responded, raising several arguments as to why his out-of-time appeal is not frivolous and why he 

is entitled to a free record.

This court does not have jurisdiction over matters related to post-conviction writs of habeas 

corpus in felony cases. See Bd of Pardons & Paroles ex rel. Keene v. Court of Appeals for the 

Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (orig. proceeding); TEX. CODE CRIM.

PROC. ANN. art. 11.07 § 3 (West Supp. 2013). Article 11.07 provides the exclusive means to 

challenge a final felony conviction, and jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas corpus relief 

on a final felony conviction rests exclusively with the Court of Criminal Appeals. Keene, 910 

S.W.2d at 483.

Additionally, an indigent defendant ordinarily is not entitled to a free copy of his trial 

transcript for purposes of filing a post-conviction habeas application. In re Strickhausen, 994 

S.W.2d 936, 937 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1999, orig. proceeding). A free record is 

available for that purpose only if the defendant shows the habeas corpus application is not frivolous 

and there is a specific need for the trial records that are sought. In re Coronado, 980 S.W.2d 691, 

693 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). We have reviewed appellant’s arguments 

in his response—all of which are arguments that could have been raised in a timely appeal from 

his 2012 conviction—and conclude he has not made any such showing here.

Finally, other than appellant’s allegation that the district clerk has refused to turn over the 

requested documents, there is no such order in the clerk’s record. Accordingly, it appears there is 

no final order or judgment from which appellant may appeal. Even if there was an order, we do 

not have jurisdiction over interlocutory orders unless jurisdiction has been expressly granted by 

law. See Ex parte Apolinar v. State, 820 S.W.2d 792, 794 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991). The narrow 

exceptions to this rule do not apply here, and we have found no statute authorizing this court to 

- 2 -
04-13-00731-CR

address an appeal of an order denying a free copy of a record after appellant’s conviction has been 

affirmed or otherwise become final.

For these reasons, we conclude we do not have jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly 

this appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish

- 3 -