Ex Parte Rajat Kumar v. the State of Texas
This text of Ex Parte Rajat Kumar v. the State of Texas (Ex Parte Rajat Kumar v. the State of Texas) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Texas Court of Appeals, 2nd District (Fort Worth) 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. 02-26-00091-CR ___________________________
EX PARTE RAJAT KUMAR
On Appeal from Criminal District Court No. 4 Tarrant County, Texas Trial Court No. 1908320
Before Wallach, J.; Sudderth, C.J.; and Walker, J. Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion MEMORANDUM OPINION
On March 19, 2026, we notified Appellant of our concern that we lacked
jurisdiction over this appeal because the trial court had not signed any written order
on his application for habeas relief. See State v. Wachtendorf, 475 S.W.3d 895, 904 (Tex.
Crim. App. 2015); Ex parte Wiley, 949 S.W.2d 3, 4 (Tex. App.––Fort Worth Dec. 5,
1996, no pet.); see also Ex parte Salim, Nos. 02-19-00009-CR, 02-19-00010-CR,
2019 WL 490516, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Feb. 7, 2019, no pet.) (mem. op., not
designated for publication). We notified him that unless he or another party filed a
response showing grounds for continuing the appeal, we could dismiss it for want of
jurisdiction.
In response, Appellant submitted a certificate of proceedings from the trial
court. However, “this court has previously rejected urgings to treat certificates of
proceedings as appealable orders.” Shields v. State, Nos. 02-21-00022-CR,
02-21-00023-CR, 02-21-00024-CR, 02-21-00025-CR, 02-21-00026-CR,
02-21-00027-CR, 02-21-00043-CR, 2021 WL 2460858, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth
June 17, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op., not designated for publication) (citing cases). We
notified Appellant that we remained concerned that this court lacked jurisdiction over
his appeal, and we cautioned him that we could dismiss the appeal unless he or
another party filed a response by April 17, 2026, showing grounds to continue the
appeal. We have not received a response.
2 Because Appellant has not filed a response showing that the trial court has
signed an appealable written order or otherwise showing grounds for continuing the
appeal, we dismiss this appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Shields, 2021 WL 2460858, at
*1; Wiley, 949 S.W.2d at 4.
Per Curiam
Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)
Delivered: June 4, 2026
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Ex Parte Rajat Kumar v. the State of Texas, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ex-parte-rajat-kumar-v-the-state-of-texas-txctapp2-2026.