David Duran v. the State of Texas
This text of David Duran v. the State of Texas (David Duran v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Texas primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas at Fort Worth ___________________________
No. 02-22-00228-CR ___________________________
DAVID DURAN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS
On Appeal from the 211th District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. F-2003-0427-C
Before Birdwell, Bassel, and Womack, JJ. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION
David Duran attempts to appeal the trial court’s order concluding that Duran is
abusing the writ process and recommending that the Court of Criminal Appeals take
no action on Duran’s twentieth Article 11.07 application for a post-conviction writ of
habeas corpus. See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07. Having no jurisdiction over
Article 11.07 writs, we dismiss Duran’s attempted appeal.
From Duran’s notice of appeal and other documents filed with it, we see that
he filed an Article 11.07 application for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus and
that he is ostensibly trying to appeal the trial court’s order concluding that Duran is
abusing the writ process and recommending that the Court of Criminal Appeals take
no action on the application. However, we have no jurisdiction over post-conviction
applications under Article 11.07. See id.; Ater v. Eighth Court of Appeals, 802 S.W.2d 241,
243 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991) (orig. proceeding) (stating that the Court of Criminal
Appeals is the “only court with jurisdiction in final post-conviction felony
proceedings”); Leyhe v. State, No. 02-20-00154-CR, 2021 WL 126369, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth Jan. 14, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.) (“We do not have jurisdiction
over matters related to post[-]conviction relief from an otherwise final felony
conviction.”).
We notified Duran of our concern that we lack jurisdiction over his appeal and
stated that unless he filed a response showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we
2 would dismiss it. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. We received no response from Duran.
Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.1 See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: December 15, 2022
1 On September 28, 2022, the Court of Criminal Appeals disposed of Duran’s application without action and entered, instead, its customary abuse-of-writ order that it first entered after Duran’s seventh application.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
David Duran v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/david-duran-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2022.