Court Opinion

ID: 9745709
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-27 10:13:55.688269+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:26:39.065563
License: Public Domain

Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus Dismissed and Memorandum Majority and
Concurring Opinions filed August 15, 2023.

                                                    In The

                            Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                                           NO. 14-23-00456-CR

                                 IN RE YU HENG TAO, Relator

                                 ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
                                WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS
                                     240th District Court
                                   Fort Bend County, Texas
                            Trial Court Cause No. 22-DCR-101104

                    MEMORANDUM CONCURRING OPINION

        I agree that this court has no subject-matter jurisdiction over a felony
preconviction habeas-corpus proceeding. 1 The district court appears to have
jurisdiction under Code of Criminal Procedure article 11.08, and this application for

        1
         The caption of this case suggests this is a Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 52 original
proceeding with a relator filing a petition. That is incorrect as this is an applicant filing an application under
Code of Criminal Procedure chapter 11 (in the wrong court). This court nonetheless treats this as an original
proceeding.
a writ of habeas corpus is directed to the 240th District Court of Fort Bend County.
The underlying problem appears to be that the application was mailed to the clerk of
the wrong court.

      I concur in the judgment only to dispose of this matter. I am not convinced
that (1) the clerk of this court must (a) file any document presented for filing, even
if the document is addressed to another court, and (2) open a case on this court’s
docket. There must be another way to handle something that was mistakenly mailed
to this court. We could give notice and allow for a response, making it clear that it
will be filed and dismissed if no sufficient response is filed.

      This is one example of why we should follow the practice in civil appeals as
set forth in Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.3 which requires notice of an
involuntary dismissal, including dismissals for want of subject-matter jurisdiction.
While not required by the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure, this court now
routinely sends notices of involuntary dismissals in criminal appeals. See Tex. R.
App. P. 42.4 (only requiring involuntary dismissal in criminal case if appellant
escapes from custody pending appeal).

      Does the absence of a rule requiring notice in original proceedings and
criminal appeals make lack of notice appropriate? After all, we have procedural rules
to satisfy federal and state constitutional requirements of notice and an opportunity
to be heard in our court proceedings. The lack of a rule does not nullify those
constitutional issues.

      What if the problem with dismissing without notice in an original proceeding
is that we are simply wrong in our legal analysis or assumptions? Are we in such a
hurry that we cannot do what we must do in civil appeals and currently do as standard
                                           2
operating procedure in criminal appeals? People do make mistakes, including people
who file things and people who rule on those things.

      Absent extraordinary circumstances, we have the luxury of telegraphing an
involuntary dismissal. We rarely receive a response when we do, which appears to
confirm the case should be dismissed. I would give notice whenever we can so that
we do not involuntarily dismiss based on a mistake of law or, in this case, what
appears to be a document intended to be filed in another court.

      I respectfully concur.

                                          /s/ Charles A. Spain
                                              Justice

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Bourliot, and Spain (Spain, J., concurring).

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

                                          3