Ex Parte Cristian Medina-Garcia v. the State of Texas
This text of Ex Parte Cristian Medina-Garcia v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte Cristian Medina-Garcia 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
NUMBER 13-23-00508-CR
COURT OF APPEALS
THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG ____________________________________________________________
EX PARTE CRISTIAN MEDINA-GARCIA ____________________________________________________________
ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT OF KINNEY COUNTY, TEXAS ____________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Chief Justice Tijerina and Justices West and Fonseca Memorandum Opinion by Justice Fonseca
Appellant Cristian Medina-Garcia challenges the trial court’s denial of his pre-trial
application for writ of habeas corpus.1 Appellant’s brief was due on January 2, 2025. On
January 13, 2025, appellant’s counsel filed “Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal.” The
motion was signed by appellant’s counsel on her own behalf and on appellant’s behalf,
“with [appellant’s] permission.” On January 14, 2025, the Clerk of this Court notified the
1 This case is before the Court on transfer from the Fourth Court of Appeals pursuant to a docket
equalization order issued by the Supreme Court of Texas. See TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 73.001. parties by letter that “Appellant’s Motion to Dismiss Appeal” failed to comply with Texas
Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) because it was not signed by the appellant. See TEX.
R. APP. P. 42.2(a). The clerk directed appellant’s counsel to file an amended, compliant
motion within ten days from the date of the notice.
More than ten days have elapsed, and appellant’s counsel has not filed an
amended motion, nor has counsel otherwise responded to the clerk’s January 14, 2025
letter. Further, counsel has not filed appellant’s brief. In light of these failures, the appeal
is hereby dismissed for want of prosecution and for failure to timely comply with a notice
from the clerk requiring a response or other action within a specified time. See TEX. R.
APP. P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b), (c). Any and all pending motions, including “Appellant’s Motion
to Dismiss Appeal,” are dismissed as moot.
YSMAEL D. FONSECA Justice
Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
Delivered and filed on the 6th day of February, 2025.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte Cristian Medina-Garcia v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-cristian-medina-garcia-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2025.