Ex Parte David Duran v. the State of Texas
This text of Ex Parte David Duran v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte 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. 02-24-00093-CR ___________________________
Ex parte David Duran
On Appeal from the 211th District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. F-2003-0427-C
Before Sudderth, C.J.; Kerr and Walker, JJ. Memorandum Opinion by Justice Walker MEMORANDUM OPINION
David Duran, proceeding pro se, attempts to appeal the trial court’s
February 12, 2024 order which concludes that Duran is abusing the writ process and
recommends that the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals take no action on his twenty-
second Article 11.07 application for a post-conviction writ of habeas corpus.1 See
Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07. We will dismiss Duran’s attempted appeal
because we do not have jurisdiction over appeals related to Article 11.07 writ
applications. See Duran v. State, No. 02-22-00228-CR, 2022 WL 17687417, at *1 (Tex.
App.—Fort Worth Dec. 15, 2022, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication)
(dismissing a previously attempted Article 11.07 appeal by Duran for lack of
jurisdiction).
We have no jurisdiction over post-conviction applications under Article 11.07.
See Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 11.07; 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”); Duran, 2022 WL 17687417, at *1.
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
1 The record shows that Duran’s attempted appeal concerns his final conviction for felony aggravated sexual assault, for which he was sentenced on September 10, 2003.
2 would dismiss it. See Tex. R. App. P. 44.3. Duran responded and stated that he
would “like to appeal” the trial court’s order for the following reasons:
• He has a right to obtain a writ under Article I of the Texas Constitution and the Open Courts Act;
• “Writ shall never be ‘suspended’ unless Rebellion or Invasion time”;
• The “Anti-Terrorism Act [] does not meet the requirement as Rebellion or invasion, only [the] Civil War 1860 was Rebellion or Invasion time and Death penalty Act does not meet it either”;
• New legal or factual bases exist; and
• The State violated his constitutional rights under Article I, Section 13 of the Texas Constitution.
None of these reasons provide us with a basis to assert jurisdiction over his
Article 11.07 appeal. For this reason, we dismiss his attempted appeal for lack of
jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
/s/ Brian Walker
Brian Walker Justice
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: April 11, 2024
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte David Duran v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-david-duran-v-the-state-of-texas-texapp-2024.