Ex parte Bowers

36 S.W.3d 926, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 588, 2001 WL 73034
CourtCourt of Appeals of Texas
DecidedJanuary 30, 2001
DocketNo. 05-00-01351-CR
StatusPublished
Cited by75 cases

This text of 36 S.W.3d 926 (Ex parte Bowers) 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 Bowers, 36 S.W.3d 926, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 588, 2001 WL 73034 (Tex. Ct. App. 2001).

Opinion

OPINION

Opinion By

Justice Lagarde

Nathan Bowers appeals the trial court’s order denying his application for writ of habeas corpus. In two issues, appellant [927]*927complains that the trial court erred by not granting his request for a hearing on the writ application and by not granting his writ on double jeopardy grounds. We dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction.

There is a distinction between the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus and the granting of relief on the claims set forth in an application for that writ. Ex parte Hargett, 819 S.W.2d 866, 869 (Tex.Crim.App.1991). An applicant cannot appeal from a trial court’s refusal to issue or grant a writ of habeas corpus, but may appeal the denial of relief on the merits of the application. See Hargett, 819 S.W.2d at 868. Whether an order can be appealed is not determined by the form of the order alone; we may consider the entire record. See Nichlos v. State, 158 Tex.Crim. 367, 255 S.W.2d 522, 526 (1952) (op. on reh’g).

Here, appellant attempts to appeal the trial court’s order denying his application for writ of habeas corpus. Neither the order — nor anything else in the record before us — reflects that the trial court considered the merits of appellant’s petition. Therefore, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Ex parte Miller, 931 S.W.2d 724, 725 (Tex.App.—Austin 1996, no pet.) (holding that the trial court’s denial of Miller’s application for writ of habeas corpus amounted to a refusal to issue the ■writ).

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

Related

Ex Parte Vicente Geronimo De Dios v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Raul Eduardo Gutierrez Ruiz v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Luis Alberto Ramos Santiago v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Juan Jose Santiago Villalobos v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Jose Enrique Madrigal Alvarado v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Ruvisel Einsten Perez Diaz v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Ruben Romero-Escandon v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Miguel Angel Alvarez Lopez v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Luis Felipe Castellano Alcudia v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Julio Gonzalez Ramirez v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Jose Rolando Ayala Uribe v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Faustino Jimenez v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Edwin Oliva Gomez v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Daniel Ayala Uribe v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Amado Lopez Villega v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Ramon Orduna Pina v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024
Ex Parte Misael Moreno Martinez v. .
Court of Appeals of Texas, 2024

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
36 S.W.3d 926, 2001 Tex. App. LEXIS 588, 2001 WL 73034, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-bowers-texapp-2001.