Court Opinion

ID: 9387225
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-16 23:10:01.66602+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:12.325913
License: Public Domain

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
                        OF TEXAS
                                   NO. WR-91,748-01

                  EX PARTE ARTHUR RAY COLLIER, Applicant

             ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
            IN CAUSE NO. 23642-A IN THE THIRD DISTRICT COURT
                            ANDERSON COUNTY

       Per curiam. YEARY, J., dissented.

                                      OPINION

       Applicant was convicted of burglary of a vehicle in 1998 and sentenced to five

years’ confinement. He did not appeal. His sentence discharged in 2003. Applicant filed

this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction in 2020, and the

district clerk forwarded it to this Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

       In the application, Applicant contends that he is entitled to an out-of-time appeal

because trial counsel failed to advise him of his right to appeal. Although he concedes

that he has discharged his sentence in this case, Applicant asserts that “harm exists”
                                                                                  Collier - 2

because his conviction “could lead to an enhancement of a felony committed after his

release.”

       Applicant has not sufficiently alleged that he is presently suffering consequences

as a result of this conviction. See Ex parte Harrington, 310 S.W.3d 452 (Tex. Crim. App.

2010). Thus, he has not shown that he is “confined” for the purpose of an Article 11.07

writ of habeas corpus, nor has he invoked the Article 11.07 habeas jurisdiction of this

Court. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07 § 3(c) (defining “confinement”).

Applicant’s application is dismissed.

Delivered: April 12, 2023

Do not publish