Court Opinion

ID: 4043419
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2016-09-28 23:20:08.514972+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T14:30:46.748140
License: Public Domain

NUMBERS 13-15-00411-CR, 13-15-00412-CR, AND 13-15-00413-CR

                            COURT OF APPEALS

                  THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

                     CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG
____________________________________________________________

RYAN EDWARD BRUSH,                                                           Appellant,

                                           v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,                                 Appellee.
____________________________________________________________

             On Appeal from the 156th District Court
                     of Bee County, Texas.
____________________________________________________________

                         MEMORANDUM OPINION
       Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Perkes
                     Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

      Appellant, Ryan Edward Brush, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal seeking

to challenge an order denying his motion for appointment of counsel to file an application

for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus. On September 10, 2015, the Clerk of this

Court notified appellant that it appeared that the order from which the appeal was taken
was not an appealable order, and requested correction of this defect within ten days or

the appeal would be dismissed. Appellant has failed to respond to the Court’s directive.

       A post-conviction writ of habeas corpus applicant is not constitutionally entitled to

appointment of counsel, although counsel may be appointed whenever “the interest of

justice require representation.” Ex parte Graves, 70 S.W.3d 103, 11 (Tex. Crim. App.

2002); Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. Art 1.051(d)(3)(West Supp. 2014). Only the judges

of county courts, statutory county courts, and districts courts trying criminal cases in each

county are authorized to appoint counsel for indigent defendants in the county. See id.

Art. 26.04(a), (b)(1).

       Jurisdiction to grant post-conviction habeas corpus relief in felony cases rests

exclusively with the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN.

art. 11.07, § 5 (Vernon Supp. 2011); 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); In re McAfee,

53   S.W     .3d   715,   717–18     (Tex.   App.—Houston       [1st   Dist.]   2001,   orig.

proceeding). Therefore, we are without jurisdiction to grant the requested relief.

       The appeals are DISMISSED for want of jurisdiction.

                                                                       PER CURIAM

Do not publish. See TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the
5th day of November, 2015.

                                             2