Ex Parte Justin Glaze Edmonds

Opinion

Opinion issued November 20, 2018

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

motion to dismiss this cause because the charging instrument was “incorrectly

charged.” Because the cause has been dismissed, the issues raised in this appeal of

the denial of his application challenging the indictment, which is no longer in effect,

are moot. See, e.g., State v. Golding, 398 S.W.3d 745, 747 (Tex. App.—Houston

[1st Dist.] 2011, pet. ref’d).

Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as moot. See TEX. R. APP. P. 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Massengale.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Footnotes

1. NO. 01-18-00235-CR ——————————— EX PARTE JUSTIN GLAZE EDMONDS, Appellant On Appeal from the 506th District Court Grimes County, Texas Trial Court Case No. 18177 MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant Justin Glaze Edmonds appealed the trial court’s denial of his pretrial application for writ of habeas corpus. We dismiss this appeal as moot. The State has suggested that this appeal is moot. In his application, appellant challenged the indictment on constitutional grounds. On October 5, 2018, a supplemental clerk’s record was filed, containing an order granting the State’s