Ex Parte Benjamin Roark v. the State of Texas
This text of Ex Parte Benjamin Roark v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte Benjamin Roark 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
Opinion issued July 13, 2023
In The
Court of Appeals For The
First District of Texas ———————————— NO. 01-23-00454-CR ——————————— EX PARTE BENJAMIN ROARK, Appellant
On Appeal from the County Criminal Court at Law No. 3 Harris County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 2456923
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Appellant, Benjamin Roark, was charged with the misdemeanor offense of
violation of a court order in trial court cause number 2447617.1 In the underlying
cause, appellant filed a pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus challenging the
constitutionality of the statute under which he was charged. After a hearing on
1 See TEX. PEN. CODE ANN. § 25.07(a)(3)(A). appellant’s habeas application, the trial court denied appellant’s pretrial application
for writ of habeas corpus. On June 9, 2023, appellant filed a notice of appeal from
the trial court’s denial of his habeas application.
Subsequently, on June 28, 2023, counsel for appellant filed a “Notice to
Court,” advising the Court that on June 20, 2023, the underlying cause “was
dismissed in connection with a plea agreement.” Counsel further stated that he
“believe[d] this development render[ed] this appeal moot.”
We agree and dismiss the appeal as moot.
“Habeas corpus is an extraordinary remedy and is available only when there
is no other adequate remedy at law.” Ex parte Cruzata, 220 S.W.3d 518, 520 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2007). “The longstanding rule in Texas regarding habeas corpus is that
where the premise of a habeas corpus application is destroyed by subsequent
developments, the legal issues raised thereunder are rendered moot.” Bennet v.
State, 818 S.W.2d 199, 200 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no pet.)
(internal quotations omitted).
Where, as here, the cause was dismissed in connection with a plea agreement,
the requested habeas relief has been mooted. “[T]he premise of [appellant’s] habeas
corpus application [has been] destroyed . . . [and] the legal issues raised thereunder
are moot.” See Ex parte Guerrero, 99 S.W.3d 852, 853 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th
Dist.] 2003, no pet.) (internal quotations omitted).
2 Accordingly, the Court dismisses the appeal as moot. See TEX. R. APP. P.
43.2(f). We also dismiss any pending motions as moot.
PER CURIAM Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte Benjamin Roark v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-benjamin-roark-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2023.