Court Opinion

ID: 9906492
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-12-03 08:29:53.967302+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:24:31.046191
License: Public Domain

Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 21, 2023

                                      In The

                     Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                               NO. 14-23-00610-CR

            EX PARTE JULIO OSCAR MEDINA- DE LA CRUZ

                       On Appeal from the County Court
                           Jim Hogg County, Texas
                          Trial Court Cause No. 1011

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      Appellant was charged with criminal trespassing. Appellant filed a pretrial
application for writ of habeas corpus. On June 20, 2023, the trial court denied
appellant’s motion. On July 18, 2023, appellant filed a notice of appeal.

      During the pendency of this appeal, the trial court granted appellant’s
motion for reconsideration; granted appellant’s application for writ of habeas
corpus; and dismissed the information charging appellant with criminal trespass.
Because the underlying charge has been dismissed and the application for writ of
habeas corpus has been granted, this appeal is moot.
      The longstanding rule in Texas regarding habeas corpus is that “where the
premise of a habeas corpus application is destroyed by subsequent developments,
the legal issues raised thereunder are rendered moot.” Saucedo v. State, 795
S.W.2d 8, 9 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1990, no writ) (citing Ex parte
Branch, 553 S.W.2d 380 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997); see Ex parte Castillo, No. 03-
20-00260-CR, 2020 WL 4462315 at *1 (Tex. App.—Austin July 17, 2020, no pet.)
(mem. op., not designated for publication).

      On October 17, 2023, we notified appellant that the appeal was subject to
dismissal for want of jurisdiction unless appellant demonstrated, within 21 days,
that the court has jurisdiction. Appellant responded that he has no objection to this
court’s dismissal of the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. Accordingly, we reinstate
the appeal and dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

                                   PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Hassan, Poissant, and Wilson.

Do Not Publish – Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

                                          2