COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00026-CR

OLIN RAY NOWLIN APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 2 OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 0628183D

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Appellant Olin Ray Nowlin filed a pro se notice of appeal in this court 

seeking to appeal the trial court’s denial of his “Request for Successive Petition.” 

We dismiss his appeal for want of jurisdiction.

Appellant was convicted of sexual abuse of a child in 1998; he received a 

life sentence; he appealed his conviction to this court; and this court affirmed his 

conviction on March 18, 1999. Nowlin v. State, 02-98-00190-CR (Tex. App.—

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

Fort Worth Mar. 18, 1999, pet. ref’d) (mem. op., not designated for publication). 

Appellant then filed post-conviction writs of habeas corpus in 2000, 2004, 2008, 

2012, and 2014.2 Although Appellant does not identify his “Request for 

Successive Petition” as yet another writ of habeas corpus, procedurally we

construe it to be a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. 

Ann. art. 11.07, § 5 (West Supp. 2014) (“After conviction the procedure outlined 

in this Act shall be exclusive and any other proceeding shall be void and of no 

force and effect in discharging the prisoner.”). Appellant has not identified any 

other procedural vehicle available to him.3

Postconviction writs of habeas corpus are governed by article 11.07 of the 

Texas Code of Criminal Procedure. Id. art. 11.07, §§ 1–7. Under article 11.07, 

only the convicting trial court and the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals have 

jurisdiction to review the merits of a postconviction habeas corpus petition; the 

courts of appeals play no role in the statutory scheme. Id. art. 11.07, § 3; Hoang 

v. State, 872 S.W.2d 694, 697 (Tex. Crim. App. 1993), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 863 

 

2Respectively trial court cause numbers C-2-4746-0628183-A, C-2-

007035-0628183-B, C-2-008606-0628183-C, C-2-009701-0628183-D, and C-2-

010347-0628183-E.

3Although Appellant indicated in his notice of appeal that he was appealing 

his sentence, and although this Court in its letter to Appellant questioned whether 

he was attempting an out-of-time appeal, we do not construe his notice as an 

attempt at an out-of-time appeal of his 1998 conviction and sentence. As noted 

earlier, Appellant timely appealed his 1998 conviction and sentence. His notice 

of appeal in this case is within thirty days of the denial of his “Request for 

Successive Petition.”
3

(1994); In re Stone, 26 S.W.3d 568, 569 (Tex. App.—Waco 2000, orig. 

proceeding) (mem. op.). The courts of appeals have no jurisdiction over postconviction writs of habeas corpus in felony cases. Bd. of Pardons & Paroles ex 

rel. Keene v. Ct. of Appeals for the Eighth Dist., 910 S.W.2d 481, 483 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 1995) (orig. proceeding). 

On February 6, 2015, we informed Appellant we lacked jurisdiction and 

instructed him to file a response showing grounds for continuing this appeal. 

Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. Appellant filed a motion to continue the appeal on 

February 25, 2015, and an “Appellant’s Brief” on March 26, 2015. Both focus on 

Appellant’s substantive arguments. Neither addresses our jurisdiction to 

entertain his substantive complaints. Accordingly, we dismiss his appeal for want 

of jurisdiction. Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GARDNER, WALKER, & MEIER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: April 16, 2015