Court Opinion

ID: 9352645
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-01-09 00:17:53.922925+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:00:49.238367
License: Public Domain

Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed January 5, 2023.

                                       In The

                     Fourteenth Court of Appeals

                               NO. 14-22-00811-CR

                       EX PARTE JESSE LEE DRONES

                    On Appeal from the 185th District Court
                             Harris County, Texas
                        Trial Court Cause No. 488772A

                          MEMORANDUM OPINION

      In this appeal, appellant, proceeding pro se, seeks review of the trial court in
his effort to seek relief pursuant to article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal
Procedure.

      The record is unclear as to what trial court action appellant is contesting in
this appeal. Regardless, based on our own evaluation of our jurisdiction, we lack
jurisdiction to grant him any relief in this appeal. Cf. State ex rel. Best v. Harper,
562 S.W.3d 1, 7 (Tex. 2018) (acknowledging the Texas Supreme Court, like Texas
courts more generally, must evaluate its own jurisdiction sua sponte). Article 11.07
of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure sets out “the procedures for an
application for writ of habeas corpus in which the applicant seeks relief from a
felony judgment imposing a penalty other than death.” Tex. Code Crim. Proc.
Ann. art. 11.07 § 1. The statute lays out a review mechanism primarily involving
both the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals and the court in which the conviction
being challenged was obtained. Id. § 3(a)–(b); see also Maye v. State, 966 S.W.2d
140, 142 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.). The statute notes that
“[a]fter conviction [its] procedure . . . shall be exclusive and any other proceeding
shall be void and of no force and effect in discharging the prisoner.” Tex. Code
Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07 § 5.

      This court informed appellant of the jurisdictional problem the statute poses,
and he was granted 21 days to demonstrate this court possesses jurisdiction over
his appeal.    Appellant has not filed any response addressing this court’s
jurisdiction. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

                                   PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Poissant.
Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).

                                          2