in Re Frankie Bartolo Mercado

Court of Appeals of Texas

in Re Frankie Bartolo Mercado

Court of Appeals of Texas·Decided March 16, 2017·No. 01-17-00168-CR·Published

Opinion

Opinion issued March 16, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

Disclosure of Information of Grand Jury” in his two underlying habeas corpus

proceedings.1

We construe the application as petitions for a writ of mandamus, but deny the

petitions.2 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Huddle.

Do not publish.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

1 The underlying cases are Ex parte Frankie Bartolo Mercado, Cause Nos. 1431388- A & 1431364-A, pending in the 262nd District Court, Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Denise Bradley presiding. We recently denied relator’s pro se petitions seeking the same mandamus relief as that sought here. See In re Frankie Bartolo Mercado, Nos. 01-17-00046-CR & 01-17-00047-CR, 2017 WL 711735, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 23, 2017, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

2 We also dismissed relator’s direct appeals for want of jurisdiction under the related trial court cause numbers 1431388 and 1431364. See Mercado v. State, Nos. 01- 16-00705-CR & 01-16-00706-CR, 2016 WL 7164013, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 8, 2016, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We note that, because our mandates issued on February 17, 2017, making his convictions final, relator may file new article 11.07 habeas petitions with the district court, made returnable with the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a) (West Supp. 2016); Ex parte Johnson, 12 S.W.3d 472, 473 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

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

Opinion issued March 16, 2017

In The

Court of Appeals

For The

First District of Texas

Disclosure of Information of Grand Jury” in his two underlying habeas corpus

proceedings.1

We construe the application as petitions for a writ of mandamus, but deny the

petitions.2 See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a), (d).

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Huddle.

Do not publish.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

1 The underlying cases are Ex parte Frankie Bartolo Mercado, Cause Nos. 1431388- A & 1431364-A, pending in the 262nd District Court, Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Denise Bradley presiding. We recently denied relator’s pro se petitions seeking the same mandamus relief as that sought here. See In re Frankie Bartolo Mercado, Nos. 01-17-00046-CR & 01-17-00047-CR, 2017 WL 711735, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Feb. 23, 2017, orig. proceeding) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication).

2 We also dismissed relator’s direct appeals for want of jurisdiction under the related trial court cause numbers 1431388 and 1431364. See Mercado v. State, Nos. 01- 16-00705-CR & 01-16-00706-CR, 2016 WL 7164013, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] Dec. 8, 2016, no pet.) (per curiam) (mem. op., not designated for publication). We note that, because our mandates issued on February 17, 2017, making his convictions final, relator may file new article 11.07 habeas petitions with the district court, made returnable with the Court of Criminal Appeals. See TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 11.07, § 3(a) (West Supp. 2016); Ex parte Johnson, 12 S.W.3d 472, 473 (Tex. Crim. App. 2000).

in Re Frankie Bartolo Mercado, (Tex. Ct. App. 2017).

Pincite

in Re Frankie Bartolo Mercado (in Re Frankie Bartolo Mercado) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related