Ex Parte Arthur Wayne Trainer

CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedApril 2, 2008
Docket09-08-00059-CR
StatusPublished

This text of Ex Parte Arthur Wayne Trainer (Ex Parte Arthur Wayne Trainer) 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.

Bluebook
Ex Parte Arthur Wayne Trainer, (Tex. Ct. App. 2008).

Opinion

In The



Court of Appeals



Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont



______________________

NO. 09-08-059 CR



EX PARTE ARTHUR WAYNE TRAINER

On Appeal from the 252nd District Court

Jefferson County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 07-00006



MEMORANDUM OPINION

On October 23, 2007, the trial court refused to rule on Arthur Wayne Trainer's application for writ of habeas corpus. Trainer filed a "Writ of Habeas Corpus Petition Request for Dismissal" in this Court. This Court does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal cases. We therefore treated the filing as an attempted appeal of the trial court's order. The trial court did not conduct an evidentiary hearing or issue the writ of habeas corpus. We questioned our jurisdiction over the appeal. Trainer filed a response pro se. He contends he has been denied a speedy trial, and he asserts the cause is set for trial on April 7, 2008. He asserts his right to proceed with the application pro se. He has not filed a petition for mandamus asking that we compel the trial court to act on the application. See Tex. R. App. P. 52. No issue of bail is raised. See Tex. R. App. P. 31.

No appeal lies from the refusal to issue a writ of habeas corpus unless the trial court rules on the merits of the application. Ex parte Hargett, 819 S.W.2d 866 (Tex. Crim. App. 1991); Ex parte Noe, 646 S.W.2d 230 (Tex. Crim. App. 1983). In this case, the trial court did not address the merits of Trainer's application. The trial court did not issue a writ of habeas corpus, nor did the court conduct an evidentiary hearing on the application for the writ. Compare Ex parte Silva, 968 S.W.2d 367 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Ex parte McCullough, 966 S.W.2d 529 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998). We hold we have no jurisdiction over this appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

APPEAL DISMISSED.

DAVID GAULTNEY

Justice

Opinion Delivered April 2, 2008

Do Not Publish



Before McKeithen, C.J., Gaultney and Kreger, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Ex Parte Noe
646 S.W.2d 230 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1983)
Ex Parte Silva
968 S.W.2d 367 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1998)
Ex Parte Hargett
819 S.W.2d 866 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1991)
Ex Parte McCullough
966 S.W.2d 529 (Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas, 1998)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Ex Parte Arthur Wayne Trainer, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-arthur-wayne-trainer-texapp-2008.